Permanent posting bans

[NoSquirrels]

Presume a TAAT is OK in Site Stuff?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3801630-LangCleg

What are the criteria you use when permanently banning posters?

Thank you in advance. I am really shocked by this particular poster being banned.

Mumsnet you are in the wrong here. FWR is the main reason I come to this site and Lang's opinion was one I valued more than most. Her comments have never struck me as aggressive or hateful, she is forthright, informed and accurate. Why are you letting this site and its users be bullied by people who wish to control women's voices and thoughts?

We try very hard to remind users of the talk guidelines and when these are broken regularly or disregarded on the boards, we have no choice but to consider banning.

The talk guidelines keep changing, and indeed the feminism topic has different moderation to the rest of the site. It makes it really difficult not to ever break TG’s, and LangCleg demonstrably had misogynists on Twitter who hate her child safeguarding expertise who were leaping on to vexatiously report every transgression. They’re now boasting about it.
I thought this site was meant to be by parents, for parents? Safeguarding matters to parents.

When LangCleg thread it trending as high up as it is, you need to admit you’ve been heavy handed. I’ve been reading and rather admiring her posts for some time, alongside a few other key posters, there is nothing phobic or unkind with the posts, they just disagree with the Tra’s position.
Also, it is possibly the kindest interpretation to say that “We mail with regards to deletions and within these mails” is disingenuous,as there is much evidence that this is not always the case. You are not even handed on the Feminist board, you do not even have the appearance of evenhandedness. The fact that you have to have a separate list of rules (some hidden, or vague) testament to this.

This is the first time I have written in this manner. My positions are generally about as beige as you can get, but in an unfair world, your position stands out as unfair - and just wrong!

Agree it looks like the TRAs squeal loudly enough until they get MN to do their bidding. Can MNHQ really not see the agenda of them wanting to silence outspoken women? And instead they’re being complicit. Shame on them.

Wow. I rarely post on MN anymore because trying to understand the moderation rules and the reasoning behind the decisions on FWR is like trying to knit with fog with one hand tied behind your back.

I think this is one in a long string of inconsistent and frankly worrying moderating decisions by HQ.

We're not able to discuss individual bans but please be assured we don't make these decisions lightly, and we discuss them at length before taking any action.

No I am not assured. I am less assured every time something like this happens. I am less assured every time a comment is deleted for incomprehensible reasons. I am less assured every time a brilliant woman is told to 'go well' when she has never been abusive or even particularly impolite. I feel like I'm walking on eggshells. If Lang fell foul of the rules to the extent she needs permanently banning then I don't understand the rules. I feel like we're all on borrowed time, waiting to be picked off, one by one, by the twitter monitors.

You are being massively played by people who wish only harm to this site.

We've all said this lots of times before though and it's just got worse.

A couple of years ago you were absolute trailblazers on allowing any sort of debate to be had here on gender and sex when no other platform would. Times change. #NoDebate is dead. You're not special any more.

This is a terrible decision, am fast losing faith in this site

There are over 450 posts on that Langcleg thread in 3 hrs mainly in support of Langcleg and in shock that she has gone. She was a real asset to this site with her calm and considered explanations. People come for the parenting tips and stay for the informed discussion. You know that. The FWR board and reasoned posters like Langcleg are part of that.

I understand that FWR is held to a higher standard and all the posters try to adhere to that as much as possible but when the rules change and are unwritten, it is impossible for posters to remain within them.

Please I urge you to reconsider.

Those tweets are sickening.

I haven't ever seen LangCleg be anything other than reasoned in posts.

This. Even when I disagreed with Lang's opinion she was always thoughtful and precise. She may have been uncompromising but never rude.

The main thing I can see which might be objected to was the criticism of MN policy. Surely MN has big enough shoulders to cope?

Is there no scope to readmit a very popular poster @MNHQ?

If Lang fell foul of the rules to the extent she needs permanently banning then I don't understand the rules.

This is basically the crux of my issue and why I started the thread.

No one on the thread over in FWR (or here) can understand the context in which this ban was the only solution.

We can’t see the posts, MNHQ won’t comment on individual cases, and of course LangCleg is banned so cannot enlighten anyone on their side of the story.

I just can’t understand which rule was violated by a poster known for being the opposite of rude and reactionary.

And I’m forced to assume it was to do with issues surrounding the Jess Phillips webchat, which was incredibly badly handled. And that feels in turn as if it’s much more about censorship than keeping a courteous and civil discussion.

And I want to know what are the rules applied for permanent ban vs temporary suspension.

I agree. LangCleg knew the rules and was measured in her responses. If it's possible for her to be banned it means anyone is fair game for those seeking to shut us up.

Look at the screenshots upthread @MNHQ. People who are not part of MN are mis-using the reporting system to get women who they've targeted banned from this site.

You're being played. We can all see it so why can't you?

MNHQ you've been courting this coercive behaviour from people you are scared of on twitter since May 2018.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3238536-Mumsnet-encouraging-brigading-by-Twitter-TRAs

This tweet is still up:

twitter.com/MumsnetTowers/status/991593570955153408

Shon 'enjoy your erasure' Faye.

Aren't you embarrassed?

Mumsnet, is it true that Joss Prior (a previously banned person) was talking with two Mumsnet moderators about how to get posters 'taken down' ?

Or is Joss Prior lying about working with Mumsnet moderators to ban people like LangCleg ?

If it is true, can we please know who Joss plus mods plan to target now that LangCleg has been deleted ?

If it is not true, could you please comment on the LangCleg thread in FWR to that effect ?

Thanks.

So, getting banned from MN apparently gives you more influence with the moderation team here than being an actual long standing contributing member.
Interesting business model.

And please could you un-ban Maryz at the same time.

Once you’ve annoyed MNHQ for whatever reason (it doesn’t even need to be FWR related) they get the banhammer out immediately. And then to top it off, ignore all emails sent after the ban.

Even if they admitted they suspended the account in question multiple times before wrongly in emails.

The moderation is and always has been appalling.

Well done @MNHQ, you have banned an expert on child safeguarding and coercive control to pander to this:

twitter.com/sakuranoseirei/status/1219677162166476800?s=21

We mail with regards to deletions

Is this a very new policy? I've had a small number of posts deleted over the years but I've never once had a notification of a deletion.

Perhaps your mail system and processes need a bit of a test?

Well done HQ, the feelings of twitter trolls prioritised over child safeguarding expertise on a supposedly woman centred parenting site.

The main thing I can see which might be objected to was the criticism of MN policy.

While I appreciate that this is MN's ball and they can take it home any time they want, we did not agree to the Special Rules when we signed up. How could we, when there is no transparency or consistency to them or how they are applied? When we don't know from one day to the next, one thread to the next, when something will suddenly get a strike that did not warrant one yesterday? When we are told one thing by the mods ("you will get an email in X circumstances") and then posters who find themselves in X circumstances receive no email to explain their sanction? And now we cannot draw attention to this lack of clarity, we cannot express unease at the censorial approach MNHQ is taking, we cannot point out the irony of the mods being subject to coercive control by those who add no value to this site, while still MN purports to be a place where posters can come for support while being coercively controlled, for threat of being banned.

There is having rules to prevent a free-for-all, and there is outright authoritarianism.

Well said Tit.

Mumsnet is just a commercial organisation. Doesn't give a fuck about FWR as long as they keep making a profit. Shame on you.

A lurker really, but solidarity to you all