Reviving some important old threads

[WrathofAsyouwereKIop]

MNHQ
Can we be assured that older threads that are revived for informative purposes for newbies, won't get retrospective deletions, just because a new person happens to take offence and report?

Oh, I see.
You mean you want content that has since been identified as hostile to people who might be reading but not posting to be allowed to stand because even though it breaks current posting guidelines, it was posted before the guidelines existed. So still potentially offensive and still contributing to a hostile environment.

Why not start a new thread with copy and pasted content that has been edited to current posting standards?

Don't you think that to just revivify these particular zombie threads could be viewed as potentially goady? Maybe? Just a bit?

Hi OP

If something breaks talk guidelines, and is reported, we will delete it - regardless of when it was posted. We've found very old racist posts before, along with disablist content and personal attacks. We certainly wouldn't feel comfortable leaving them up, tbh!

Thanks for the reply Lily, I thought that would be the case.
There are some shockers from the past with rudeness towards posters.
I wouldn't want this place to get as bad as Twitter.

eBooksAreBooks

Do you think old books that might offend should be burnt or get their pages ripped out too?

eBooksAreBooks
Old threads that are revived for good reason will probably benefit with a tidy up.

Twitter as you know, can be far more vicious.

Interesting philosophical discussion potential here... At what point does an internet thread become an historical document? And therefore should be immune to being altered, defaced, deleted or hidden away?

Perhaps rather than deleting, MNHQ might consider locking old threads so that they cannot be posted on, and placing a message at the top describing them as historical.

MoaningMinniee
These forums are a snapshot of a particular moment. I would imagine all future historians would consider these as artifacts relevant to these times.
I would hate to see important threads thinned out so much that the original message is diluted. But then that might be the intention of the people reporting so-called offensive posts.

I can't imagine that anything ever posted on MN would be considered to be an important historical document.

For social commentary on the attitudes demonstrated on a parenting website, I imagine it would be a useful primary resource for studies.
I wouldn't dismiss it at all.

I can't imagine that anything ever posted on MN would be considered to be an important historical document.

Oh no, surely you know everything over in FWR is ever so important.

@eBooksAreBooks

FWR - what's that then?

If something breaks talk guidelines, and is reported, we will delete it - regardless of when it was posted.

As someone has bought up FWR, which has different mod'ing rules, would these deletions count toward a strike and therefore be ban worthy?

ItsLateHumpty
Interesting point there.
An old thread that (could be within the last few months) brings up an instance where someone feels the need 'to report'.
Then all at once, the strikes add up to a ban for a regular poster?

There's at least one academic getting scholarly articles about Mumsnet published in journals.

Then all at once, the strikes add up to a ban for a regular poster?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'regular' poster, but it would affect any poster with a history, now or in the future.

If you accumulate enough deletions in a rolling period, you could be banned - and all that would need is for me to AS a now banned term, report, and retrospectively a user is banned.

@LilyMumsnet the examples you use would always have been against talk guidelines, presumably.

I think what Wrath is asking (correct me if I'm wrong) is, if an old thread is revived that pre-dates the new talk guidelines on FWR, would you retrospectively apply those rules? E.g. a post from 2017 that used the word TF, cs or TM would have been within the talk guidelines at the time of writing, but not now.

And if you did retrospectively apply those rules, would such a deletion count as a 'strike'?

This is a real concern:

If you accumulate enough deletions in a rolling period, you could be banned - and all that would need is for me to AS a now banned term, report, and retrospectively a user is banned.

LangClegsInSpace
Yes that is how I am thinking.
Those were clear examples but the ambiguity of some deletions may also inflict a ban. This will enable the targeting of posters by picking them off one by one, retrospectively.
As in the "One t**f at a time" quote on social media directed at Lang after she was banned.
I'm also concerned that older threads might lose some context with such belated deletions. Another way to get useful, informative threads removed.

Not in the spirit I think.

I agree with langclegsinspace

That’s certainly how i read wraths post and I’m interested in the answer

It's time HQ stood up to the bullies. No example to our DCs.

This is indeed something that the needs a clear, published policy from MNHQ. There probably isn’t one yet but there needs to be sharpish.

It would seem fair for all threads started before the change in guidelines to be locked and bannered as pre-dating the change in guidelines. I imagine that’d be a huge task though...

I can't imagine that anything ever posted on MN would be considered to be an important historical document.

I expect the Westminsterenders threads will be a very valuable research resource in the future. FWR stuff too, if not retrospectively edited.

They were used as a teaching resource in some citizenship and culture courses that I am aware of. They are gold dust if you want a snapshot of prevailing opinions, changing language and attitudes to current affairs.

Oh - and my view is that they should not be edited. "Offensive" words could be redacted if absolutely necessary but the post should stand and its context made clear.

It's time HQ stood up to the bullies. No example to our DCs

I don’t understand what this means...what bullies

I'd favour a policy that says that if a certain amount of time has passed since the post was made it can't be deleted except in absolutely exceptional circumstances. The worst stuff gets reported at the time, surely?