Qui tacet consentire videture... I want it to be understood by MNHQ and by guests to this site that my silence on the subject of the recent speculative threads does NOT condone their existence.

[Aitch]

Aitch.

lol good idea was to the is it really necessary.
good idea cod re the o level certs.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

A lot of people went 'HAH' not because these particular threads are allowed but because we felt the bumping of the thread and the posting of posts that had nothing to do with the topic (cleaning and slugs) are not the way to go and were pleased HQ agreed (imo)

People find all sorts of things distasteful and if everyone bumped topics off, there would be nothing left to discuss

Some parts of the MM threads were hard to see but a lot of it wasn't, most were just questioning news reports and many were in support of the McCanns.

A set of members, however huge, quite rightly shouldn't be allowed to stop conversations just because they don't like it

Message withdrawn

Not read all of it - but totally agree with OP.

Wisty

boris!
(what do you know that we dont?)

wisty

Abby used to be a high class call girl, but her latex allergy got so bad she had to move to MNHQ

Threads do veer of course, however, and I find it just as bullying to spraff off, 'Stop talking about cleaning because we want to go on knitting in front of the guillotine.'

So is this now turning into a debate about sensorship versus freedom of speech?

What worries me now is that many people now seem to be asking for sensor ship. We know where to go if we want sensor ship. Though I don't believe in idle horrid speculations, I do believe in freedom of speech and that is something we so far have enjoyed on Mumsnet.

So, do you want the site moderated? Threads deleted left right and centre, rules that you cannot post about deleted threads, etc?

Hope I'm not too late to sign

Quint

there is a marked difference between threads veering and intentional sabotage expat as well you know.

As someone who does post when there is news to discuss I obviously dont want to be lumped in with those amateur Quincy types - but I disassociate myself from them by leaving the discussion when it turns that way.

Simple and effective I find. I dont bother saying 'dont post that' because who I am to say that?

We all know that the quotes in the media from Mumsnet dont really represent the majority of the MN community - but we're always saying how manipulative and not to be trusted the press is - we know this - so that part of it really doesnt concern me.

Thing is - I hear people speculate /discuss MMC in RL (the cleaners mostly as the rest of us are antisocial buggers), and knitting by the guillotine is fine, but the very nice women who clean my office don't get quoted in the national press, with a "said by someone that works at NSFs office"

I don't want to be tarred with the brush of some of the things that have been said on some of the rather rubber necked threads on here.

So this thread is a good idea if only so that I could sign up

(am not for censorship btw)

And there's a difference between libel and discussion, too, binkle.

I dont disagree.

Signed
Skyler

The bottom line is that if, before I had joined, I had read the quotes from mn that were in the guardian I probably wouldn't have bothered to find it. It is BAD for membership to have that aspect of the discussions that go on here in the media, it will put off reasonable people joining.
However that is the result of having a self moderating forum. It can't be any other way or it will lose what is wonderful about it along with what is crap.

Binkle - I thought you werent mentioning "contradiction"?

Still waiting for evidence of it, nonetheless. If you are going to continue to sling mud, that is.

You still havent got what this thread is about either.

I the above sign...
One or two comments or observations on breaking news - quickly legged it and never to return to those threads

I think the problem here is with that particular thread, not differences of opinion in general. For instance, I have just been on another "I don't like that thread" thread and stood up for the thread in question as the debate was fair imo.

Given that comments from the MMcC thread were published in the meedja, that there were potentially libellous statements on the thread, and the recent Gina debacle; I fail to see what the problem is with people wanting to actively distance themselves from something so vile and distateful. I don't believe that anyone is asking for censorship at all. We just don't wish to be associated with the nastiness.

Late signer, I agree totally with Aitch and so far have registered by disgust by staying away from the relevant threads but they just keep going and going with no new information just mindless speculation and tittle tattle.

Was it this post you were referring to?

By VeniVidiVickiQV on Fri 07-Sep-07 22:10:12
Oh this isnt pretty.....

"By binkleandflip on Mon 10-Sep-07 13:00:39
there is a marked difference between threads veering and intentional sabotage expat as well you know.

As someone who does post when there is news to discuss I obviously dont want to be lumped in with those amateur Quincy types - but I disassociate myself from them by leaving the discussion when it turns that way.

Simple and effective I find. I dont bother saying 'dont post that' because who I am to say that?"

Well, MNHQ has just said that it wants you to argue with them, tbh. and so far your 'simple and effective' solution has been vastly ineffective by any standards.

all we're doing here is adding our voices to your silence, as it were. i'm not sure i see the problem.