Thread sabotage

[JustineMumsnet]

Evening all,
As you know we aren't ones to intervene when threads go off topic as a rule but we think that sabotaging threads you would rather weren't on Mumsnet/find distasteful is not really in the spirit of the place. We are, after all, generally in favour of free speech and people's right to express their opinions - even ones we might prefer not expressed.
If you believe any particular posts break our abuse policy - i.e. are personal attacks, obscene or defamatory - please do report them and we will respond as soon as we can - though not always immediately at weekends/after hours/during England matches.

Cheers,

Mumsnet Towers

I joined Blu's boycott thread many months ago.

But I agree that this means that threads like the one from yesterday can go unchallenged.

And they need to be challenged.

So from now on I will post that I find the thread to be inappropriate.

I will post once, and leave it there.

I am hoping that there are enough emotionally intelligent MNers to mean that if we all do this, the threads will soon get bumped to the max!

And I am disappointed that MN have found in favour of this distasteful, ambulance-chasing, speculative and inconsiderate atmosphere.

I had hoped that the disgusting discussions about what may or may not have happened to this child were less "in the spirit of the place", than merely bumping a thread that discusses the topics that were included yesterday.

It appears that is not the case though.

Which is disappointing.

the actual quote in the guardian yesterday was:

" I do think the McCanns have acted oddly throughout this investigtion, particularly the mother, commented Krazykoolkazza, 'I can't quite see it as natural for a mother in her position to make one of her emmidiate priorities in the days immediately following the disappearance of her daughter a visit to the pope - without her remaining children'.

a perfectly reasonable comment in my opinion. not one that denigrates the site as a whole.

I'm with MB, McEdam, Hunker and MMJ on this one.

Martianbishop, you are a very opinionated person. In this instance, as in others, i totally agree with you, i saw the thread, was incredulous. So much so i lost my ability to spell!

I too will be posting messages on MmC threads if I see something tasteless and OTT - a short message to say I have informed mumsnet HQ. At least it means my opinion is public, my voice is heard.

Some of us don't want to get drawn into long drawn out arguments over speculative details on MmC threads. The other less controversail option is to post distracting messages. If MN HQ are asking us not to do this, posting to say 'I have informed MN HQ' is the only viable option for me.

I looked at these threads yesterday and decided it would be better not to comment. But Martianbishop's posts are making me rethink!

I too am appalled by some of the comments made yesterday. I have a little theory, though, about why people feel the need for all this gossipy speculation. I think that people need to distance themselves from the horrific thought that this could happen to them, too. So we go around saying "I would never leave my kids alone", or "The mother must have done it" (indulging in ridiculous fantasies as to exactly how she did it), etc as a way of telling ourselves that our own child could never be snatched from us because we are much too careful/kind etc.

The truth is that accidents, and much worse, can and do happen to anyone. But we dont want to contemplate it.

Or maybe I have just read too much pop psychology.

I think the threads on whether or not she should have been left alone are one thing- that sort of thing will be discussed and although pointless in a way is not offensive. It's a fair discussion.

The thread I read yesterday was far removed from that.

I think Tigermoth's idea is a good one.

Of course people are entitled to post on these threads to say that they find the speculation abhorrent. However, the repetitive bumping is witless. Those who hate these threads and want to sabotage them would have more moral force behind them if they actually engaged in argument with the other posters. Otherwise, it does come across as wanting to remove others' freedom of speech. And no, I don't think that your right to say 'poopants' is as compelling. Your right to put forwards a reasoned argument, however, goes without saying.

I am completely with McEdam, mb et al on this. I had also pledged not to post on these threads but yesterday's was like the worst form of tabloidese sickening speculation, and included some utterly vile hypotheses about the McCanns' behaviour. I am disappointed that MNHQ condones it, and although I didn't join in with the sabotage I think their actions were reasonable. Frankly, it's beginning to be a case of that or leave MN.

Well said, Hunker, love 'minds so narrow the sides touch'. Exactly.

Haychee, etc., people who object to the McCann obsessives and the lurid speculation DID post rebuttals of the more fantastical, disgusting posts. AND point out the risks of libel and damaging MN's reputation. But the (putting it mildly) over-excited muck-rakers carried on regardless.

Bumping threads to 1,000 and talking about cleaning also counts as free speech, you know. Not that most of the McCann obsessives have any idea about the definition of free speech or how to look it up.

Look, there is clearly a division of opinion. Some find it distasteful and some do not. Why does there need to be such an uproar about it? Post your distaste and outline the risks of libel and leave the thread. That way you have then disassociated yourself from the thread. Not too much of a problem in my opinion.

Seriously, people are discussing this case all over the world so why not here too. I agree some of the descriptions were horrific but if it upsets you then lodge your distaste and move on.

This is a mums forum, a public forum, a mother has been accused of harming her own child, seems quite appropriate that it shou;d be allowed to be discussed on this site.

I've been thinking about thread saboutage not being 'in the spirit' of Mnet. When I joined over 5 yrs ago, Mnet was a place where anyone could come for support and advice, and have a chat along the way. Surely that is still what Mnet is for? Many mums will come here who suffer from anxiety, depression, and possibly bereavement, who acnnot deal with hearing about the suffereing of a child, for whom these threads will only make matters worse. It is impossible to avoid the threads b/c they come up in active convos, and teh titles do not give aclue as to how repulsive some of the content has been.

I am surprised that 'free speech' is taking priority over the many mums who come to mnet for help and support whilst in a fragile state of mind.

I couldn't agree more trinity. I think the site is barely recognisable now compared with how it was- the supportiveness is still there but is in danger of being swamped by the mindless gossip.

Hunker, I love your descriptions.

what MB's talking about is 'qui tacet consentire videture', defined as: He who keeps silent is assumed to consent; silence gives consent.

I want a thread called 'qui tacet NON consentire videture', where i can sign my name. in fact, i may just start it if someone else hasn't already. although i may start it in English.

Brilliant idea actually Aitch, I wish you would.

Am I the only one to find it slightly ironic that those sensitive souls who have appointed themselves the moral guardians of MN seem to have a detailed working knowledge of the offending threads in question. It's rather like those constantly slate the tabloid the press while soaking up every detail - but only on the internet of course!

done it

Sorry - forgot to add I find the Christian prayer threads a bit tedious, but I just don't click on them.

sorry meant to say sign here if you want to that is

LilianGish, I haven't read the threads, but have gathered enough to know that I am glad I haven't.

Please listen to what I am saying. If you suffer from anxiety or depression, particularly related to children, these threads can cause an enormous amount of distress. It doesn't take much to trigger anxiety attacks - for some just seeing the story occurring again and again in active convos will be enough. The reason such a person will be on Mnet in the first place is to get help and support and instead they end up feeling worse. You may find the Christian praye rthread annoyong but it won't reduce you to a state of panic for the rest of the week.

The purpose of Mnet is to support parents and give them a place to find support, not as a place for gossiping about tragedies such as this one.

Such anxiety provoking threads are easy to avoid though are they not?

Startouchedtrinity, sorry to hear you have such a seriously problem, genuinely didn't want to upset you. Fwiw I live abroad and use MN to talk to other English mums and was interested to get an English perspective on such a massive news story. I certainly don't agree with some of the extreme views expressed, but I accept the fact that in a free country people are entitled to express those opinions.