Does MNHQ Check Our Inboxes?

[Chillyourbeans]

Just wondering. I received a private message and sent 2 replies and now the recipient has received a message from MNHQ saying the replies were removed at my request. Except that's not true, I made no such request.

Some people chatting and suggesting it is not all members being asked to do it.

And yet countless threads have been spammed with the link and the PMs did happen.

So some did take it as a call to arms.

Anyone that crosses MN will soon be begging to come back here.

What does this mean?

What do you mean “cross MN”? Why would anyone beg to come back if they’re already a member? You don’t have to give up your MN membership to join another forum.

@SomethingOnce it's a little embarrassing to watch really.

I don't see the outrage over this all. If you want all the snazzy features then pay £5 a month

What snazzy features? Fewer ads (doesn't say how many fewer) and an 18 second edit button.

I like the other forum, it has all the functions I expect from a 21st Century forum but I will also will continue to be on MN despite it having none. However I will not be paying because we members provide the content and without us, MN would be nothing.

Looks like illegal activity members plotting to PM people here to tell them about other sites.

They obviously have not heard about the Competition and Markets Authority who have legal power. Silly move!

And yet countless threads have been spammed with the link and the PMs did happen.

So some did take it as a call to arms.

Doubtless, they did. But that’s very different than what you claimed- “All the members over there were asked to spam here to recruit members via PM”

Which is simply not true.

Yes, a couple of people have, maybe as many as FOUR.
I've barely seen a link (maybe 2?) on the boards so MN is hardly overrun.

What do you mean “cross MN”? Why would anyone beg to come back if they’re already a member? You don’t have to give up your MN membership to join another forum.

I'm not going to fall for your trap (im smart) but you know there is a thread on the other site where people are talking about being banned from MN.

Meh. Every time this happens it’s because someone thinks they can reinvent the wheel. They all get incredibly excited thinking they’re going to change the world or something and within a week it’s all blown over and not much is different.

You make my point for me Arrietty (are you a fellow Studio Ghibli fan) you're not bothered and have decided that for yourself! You don't need to be protected from infomation about it.

They obviously have not heard about the Competition and Markets Authority who have legal power. Silly move!

I did wonder about the legal aspect.

Has MN trademarked AIBU, for example?

I imagine right now MNHQ have bigger fish to fry and as discussed earlier, this sort of thing tends to happen every so often and eventually fizzles out. So I doubt they've instructed their legal team just yet 😂

I'm not going to fall for your trap (im smart) but you know there is a thread on the other site where people are talking about being banned from MN.

No idea what you mean by my “trap” but thanks for clarifying you meant those who were banned by MN.

Wasn’t AIBU brought in because it existed on another forum and users here wanted it too?

You know the group is nothing like Mouldies, right? Despite someone claiming its just the same above.
Anyone can join. Anyone can be a member of both groups. You don’t need to be annoyed you didnt get a pm personally inviting you.
If you've looked and don’t like it then don’t use it. Its pretty easy.

Though many of you claim it's a pile of crap but are clearly reading it and going back for more.

*I did wonder about the legal aspect.

Has MN trademarked AIBU, for example?*

it's quintessentially mumsnet, they're on very dodgy legal grounds ripping that off

And if you want all talk of it to stop and think its unfair of them to poach MN users you might want to think about stopping posting what you’ve read over there and thereby creating drama here.

Has MN trademarked AIBU, for example?

Can you trademark something as ubiquitous as forum title? Real question.

And if you want all talk of it to stop and think its unfair of them to poach MN users you might want to think about stopping posting what you’ve read over there and thereby creating drama here

Erm... No. They're actively spamming Mumsnet and then saying their not.

From a different thread, about how to advertise the new site (which I've no problem with, except the following highlights)

I did screenshot more, but it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

I’ve been on other long standing forums who also use ‘AIBU’ as a section...
Bemusing that some of you think Mumsnet is so high and mighty that it would own the phrase.

Good idea.

Does anyone know if I can use lamb stock as a base for pepper and chilli soup?

I have bags & bags of frozen lamb stock and a pile of peppers and they need to be married together somehow.

I'm still confused. I'm a member on both sites and wasn't asked to PM anyone. I received one message asking for a link. One. I sent two replies, mainly because I am crap at links so did it twice to be sure I'd done it properly. I wasn't spamming, I was replying to a question. I freely admit I provided a link MNHQ would probably have preferred me not to. What I want to know is how did MNHQ know about this exchange of messages? I couldn't actually give a flying fuck that they were deleted but I do want to know if MNHQ is routinely accessing my private messages or if this is a one off. I think that's a perfectly reasonable question.

They're actively spamming Mumsnet and then saying their not.

Have they said they’re not? Where?

Canyou trademark something as ubiquitous as forum title? Real question.

I haven't a clue, was just musing. AIBU was MNs USP for a while though wasn't it.

And Castiel brings the drama!
You're husband would be disappointed.

A few people spamming is not all or even most or even many people spamming. Shall I dig up and post screenshots of MN members suggesting similar behaviour about other sites? 😆

Oh OK, they're openly admitting to spamming the site then.

Sorted.

Erm... No. They're actively spamming Mumsnet and then saying their not.

The evidence doesn't lie, there is a spamming campaign going on.

Is there a law against spam?

The legal team are going to find it easy to end this.