Civility - what we should and shouldn't allow

[JustineMumsnet]

Hello all,
We've just deleted a thread entitled:
"AM a bit pissed so this isnt gonna be worded as eloquently as one would wish, but Gordon Brown is a bit of a cock sucker so who the fuck are we gonna vote for?" on the grounds that some folk had complained, it's a personal attack and also we'd like to get him on for an online chat and we didn't think leaving it up would be helpful in that regard .

But it did get us thinking about what sort of guidelines (beyond posts which break the law) we should have as a rule, particularly with regard to folk who are in the public eye - celebs etc.

We've always shied away from deleting on the grounds of poor taste (who's taste and where do you draw the line?) and we certainly are not too fussed about swear words. But naturally there's a lot of comment on MN, much of it tongue in cheek for sure, that could be construed as as abusive towards famous folk - equally true is that it's an awful lot tamer than elsewhere on the net.

Mumsnet (as you know ) is pro freedom of speech as a rule and have no wish to censor or stop the conversation flowing. What's more our stated aim is to make parents' lives easier - and a bit of bit of a vent/laugh is often a useful thing but should we intervene more or is it a case of just reminding/ urging folk to be civil and treating each case on it's merit?

Should there be one rule for celebs and one rule for the rest? Had the Gordon Brown comment been made on the thread and not in the title of it, we might have been inclined to let it stand - but does that make any sense?

We'd be very grateful if you'd let us know your thoughts about where you think the lines should be drawn and what sort of level of intervention you'd like.
Ta very mucho,
MNHQ

[SmileysPeoples]

I quite like all the swaering.

I very rarely swear in RL, as usually kids about, or at work (apparently it's not professional)or something. On here there's a feeling of mums leeting loose a bit, loosing the respectable mummy persona foe a while.

That's why 'cunting sainburys' was so funny.

I'd never say that in RL, but might well feel that sentimemnt.

[Polgara2]

Hmm tricky. Don't like to see personal attacks in thread title whoever they are aimed at, but then again, quite capable of just not reading them if I don't want to. However, I really, really don't like to see that level of profanities in a thread title. Apart from thinking it just isn't necessary, as someone who has mumsnet on in the background and flits in and out, my children are frequently in the room (I am a Mum after all ), if they come to talk to me I have to remember its in active convos and quickly move off the screen.

[Holysmoke]

I see what you mean SP but if that's the case, it's a little bit pathetic at the same time.

[SmileysPeoples]

Personal attacks a differnt matter. I think NQC point earlier about comments about poeple who are not here to defend themselves should maybe be considered differently.

I personally have no objections to individual personal comments about celebs, but when it becomes a reoccuring running joke with the 'crowd' involved, it does feel more insidious and harmful.

Not sure how you'd ploice that though.

[mytwopenceworth]

i really wanted to contribute to this but my tiny mind is unable to sort itself out!!

i object to the idea that you cannot freely express your opinion. however, i also think that opinion on a topic should not lead to a personal attack. but is that a contradiction? isn't freedom of opinion also the freedom to have and to express the opinion that someone is a %#$$~£$>; ?? then i also think that people are entitled to be heard and to have their viewpoint respected by others, even if you don't agree with it, and it's good to debate, but not to slag each other off. understand and respect the difference between the opinion and the person - but is there really a difference? you opinions are who you are, so if i think your opinion is wrong or daft??? .... and i go round in circles!

i do think we should all show each other more respect and courtesy. stop using the pc as a shield and, basically, if you wouldn't say it to my face, don't say it to my screen!! it being 'liberating to be able to be so honest' is just saying it's great to be able to be rude to people without the risk of them punching me!

perhaps if we all started seeing it differently and classed rudeness up there with sausage rolls, fruit shoots and burberry??

[SmileysPeoples]

Pathetic? How?

[Housemum]

Peachy - sorry if I made it sound like you should clear off if you don't like swearing. I personally don't swear on threads (exception below - it felt very strange typing it!) but it would not stop me from reading a thread with swearing - in the same way that a drama on TV might use words that I don't like/use. I don't like unimaginative use of swear words when you can't think of anything else to say, but I don't think you can ban people from using them, all you can do is ask for consideration when posting a thread title (though most people would probably not read/consider a reminder anyway unless it was flashing in big 6 foot green letters)

[PeachyChocolateEClair]

MTP great post (I think )

I really don't think anythiong should be banned, but fail to see why we can't take it upon ourselves to try (just in the titles after all) to try to be mindful of others personal feelings.

how hard would it have been (accepting this one was alcohol related and dont we all have our moments...) to have said:

@I really think Gordon Brown is a.... ? Or Gordon Brown is a $%^& and I need a rant about him?

Surely respecting others is part of being a thread for intelligent woman?

[Dimpled]

Throughly agree smiley, holysmoke deeming something pathetic is pathetic. Will defend the cunting sainsburys thread all the way.

[PeachyChocolateEClair]

Housemum we agree then, as thats what I vaguely said- just remnd people to think first.

[Holysmoke]

You misunderstand. I mean pathetic in the traditional sense rather than the slang and insulting sense.

[SmileysPeoples]

Pathetic I don't swear more in RL?? Strill don't understand.

I think being an adult you learn what kind of languahe is appropriate in what situations.

Eg many men (nad women) use really foul language at the football, that they'd never use at home or work.

Dh and I had this conversation when he started taking DS to football and I was concerned about foul language. Dh said that DS would hear the language but learn from us that it was one thing for grown men to use that langaue at football and totally another for him or us to use that langaue at home/school/work etc.

I think he was right.

Isn't MN for grown women?

[Holysmoke]

I dunno. I wonder sometimes.

[Katy44]

It's always going to be subjective though - littlelapin, yes, I did regret the "sodding babies" one as I could understand how it was offensive. I then found it incredible a week or so later to read a new thread called "Bugger the babies..." or something - does anyone know why that one was OK as I can't see the distinction, but AFAIK no-one mentioned it.

[Katy44]

My point beinf self-moderation might not work too well either

[Dimpled]

Katy 44 - I liked the 'sodding babies' as it is so real and honest. That is what I like about mumsnet.

[SmileysPeoples]

I missed the 'sodding babies'. Why were they sods and why was it objected too?

Dimpled are you dimpledthighs?

[Porcupine]

OI THAT was me
adn it was flippign babies

[Porcupine]

sdn if you are offende byt hat YOU sSO SO SO need to get out more

[Greensleeves]

Holysmoke, I think you've blundered into the wrong forum - here is your true spiritual home

[Katy44]

Porcupine, no, it was this one

[VeniVidiVickiQV]

I think it should be a free-for-all, as long as apparent personal attacks on celebs are always pre-fixed by "AIBU in thinking..." and started in the AIBU topic.

Rather than MNHQ delete any threads that contravene this - they should simply be moved to the AIBU topic and MNHQ prefix the thread title with "Is xxxOPerxxx allegedly being unreasonable in thinking......." so that we can all see what the blardy hell was so awful that it may be deemed too offensive

Please please please PLEASE can we also have a rubberneck emoticon?

[WelshBoris]

I can't believe MNHQ let it stay for as long as they did.

Too busy eating KitKats I suppose

[PeachyChocolateEClair]

PMSL Welshy One