Why is it suddenly ok to make multiple threads on the same subject over and over again?

[DayBath]

I'm talking about the Feminism board. Please could MN explain why it's ok for the same poster to keep starting new threads on the same topic repeatedly without the previous ones filling up or reaching any limit?

Surely there's a point where this is considered "not in the spirit" as you love to say. By all means this person should be allowed to post but why are repeated threads within hours of each other being allowed to cause Groundhog Day over there?

Yesterday was a dreadful day. Many tried to hard, including MNHQ who probably felt that they had the eyes of an army of TRAs on them

Mmmmm people coming in to post on MN who fundamentally don't give a wotsit about the site, who have never been there to hold a hand, offer advice, share a tip and so-on and who fundamentally don't care about the site, what it offers or what it means - but they are happy to try and disrupt it. On the other hand, you have posters, mainly women, I suspect most who are mothers, who contribute more widely to the site, probably actually use those who advertise/sponsor it and so-on. I think there is a lesson here ...

I find this thread quite hilarious and ironic considering the active campaign of the FWR regulars to spam the AIBU board and the rest of the site with repetitive dubiously anti-trans threads for the past few weeks. Don’t like the taste of your bitter own medicine eh?

Spartacus, that is a very good point. The OP came into the site (I believe first time ever) in order to stir up trouble and post on it on Twitter.

Then you have the regular posters who provide content every day all over the site often with special (and changing) names for the FWR board to avoid being targeted for eloquence. These are also the people who actually buys the products advertised as they both are likely to use them and in addition likely to be subconsciously influenced by the advertising as they are exposed daily.

I hope this will be discussed in the MNHQ meeting. My point is that the right people need to make a calculated, strategic decision on this. It will not be instantly.

AIBU is a large board and it has not been 'spammed' - it has been contributed to by MN regulars who post in multiple sections of MN. OTOH FWR has been spammed by outsiders who have been quite open on Twitter that they are being goady.

@mummywantstobeslim

The feminism Boards don't bother me really. It's the fucking coronavirus board that I cannot block through my phone that really pisses me off. It's so depressing , constant whinging there etc 🙄

You should be able to hide it on the desktop and then reopen your app and it will be gone (I have it hidden)

@AllTheGuac

I find this thread quite hilarious and ironic considering the active campaign of the FWR regulars to spam the AIBU board and the rest of the site with repetitive dubiously anti-trans threads for the past few weeks. Don’t like the taste of your bitter own medicine eh?

Good point about the AIBU board - there's been almost daily near identical threads on there lately.

@AllTheGuac I haven’t seen any anti trans posts, you should report these as MNHQ doesn’t tolerate them, quite rightly.
Raising issues to get wider sunlight or exposure by posters who are invested in the site being a success are so far removed from non regulars conducting experiments that your analogy simply doesn’t stand up.

@AllTheGuac it is not quite the same.

The equivalence would be to create a thread, wind you up by continuously posting the things that seemed to annoy you in order to try to get you so angry that you posted something that got you deleted.

Then to start a separate thread on what seemed to annoy you the most and name check you.

Finally, the conversation, including your user name, would be posted on Twitter with a commentary about how stupid you were.

This would be circulated (according to previous agreement) amount several Twitter platforms with additional commentary.

That is the equivalence.

@AllTheGuac

I find this thread quite hilarious and ironic considering the active campaign of the FWR regulars to spam the AIBU board and the rest of the site with repetitive dubiously anti-trans threads for the past few weeks. Don’t like the taste of your bitter own medicine eh?

I don't think it was the same posters repeating the same thing before existing posts had filled up though. Variety of posters and variety of talking points or events upon which to base the threads

It's not 'suddenly OK'

It's the site norm, and I've been reprimanded in the past for suggesting that someone posts on one of the several threads already running. It's 'unwelcoming'

There are sites where it's a major breach of site norms to duplicate a thread. MN is not such a site.

Use the 'hide thread' function, rather than seeking to exclude those who are posting on this site in ways that are totally normal for this site

It's the site norm, and I've been reprimanded in the past for suggesting that someone posts on one of the several threads already running. It's 'unwelcoming'

I understand this, and have seen similar in the past, especially if it's related to breaking news. However in those cases the current threads on the topic haven't been made by the same poster.

It's easy to miss a thread on a topic that has been started by another poster, it's an entirely different thing for the same poster to make multiple threads on the same topic.

Different situation @AuntieStella

Someone posting a new thread asking about a topic when they didn't notice one was already running by someone else is very different to the same person making multiple posts within hours of each other asking literally the same questions

The norm on FWR with multiple threads on the same topic (unintentionally, by different posters obviously) seems to be for someone to mention the other, maybe link to it, and then the second OP generally says 'thanks! I'll get this one deleted'

I've been accused of making 'multiple threads' as though it's some kind of crime. My family are undertaking a complex legal case and we have been told by the solicitor to find certain information for them to collate. It costs us about £100 just to ask the simplest of questions, so I ask here on the legal and financial boards. I get good reliable answers from people who know what they are talking about, but oh my god, do I get a lot of abuse and condemnation from people who feel they have the right to comment on the case itself. Multiple threads are not the issue, it's using the MN platform for propaganda. MN need to address this themselves.

it's using the MN platform for propaganda

What propaganda would that be?

Wow, my first ever deletion in 15+ years. Genuinely surprised - plenty of other posts here saying the same thing

Hello.

It won't be news to anyone reading this that MNHQ's commitment to hosting conversations on this difficult issue has been costly for us in lots of ways. It would be much easier for us to throw up our hands and say we won't host these discussions anymore, but we carry on because we believe it's the right thing to do. However the flip side of that is that it's absolutely crucial for us to be inclusive to voices from both 'sides' - because if we aren't, we're not hosting a discussion: we're hosting a filter bubble. There's no running away from the fact that in some circles FWR is regarded as being hostile to trans people and we're determined to show that we are not. Mumsnet is a site where almost anyone is welcome to post so long as they can stick to our rules. That's a fundamental decision we took a long (long) time ago and it's never changed.

A diversity of voices means there will be threads and posts outlining positions that many in FWR strongly disagree with. This may feel like goadery to some but, frankly, we disagree. It's not surprising that some brand new posters aren't yet fully up to speed with site etiquette and we're inclined to take a laissez-faire approach to that unless we think someone is purposefully here to goad - which, to be clear, we don't think that OP was given her apology on yesterday's thread and her generally constructive posts.

On 'cis', we think it's deletable when it's being used deliberately to inflame, but we also recognise that for a lot of trans-friendly voices it's a crucial piece of language, so that's the context in which we consider reports about that.

Please bear in mind that it's against our rules to 'chase off' posters - there are a few posts here that seem to us to fall into that category.

We're committed to hosting conversations in FWR that are inclusive. We know this will feel uncomfortable for many at first, but it's a really important operating principle as far as we can see.

Unfortunately your analysis of the situation post-Soreen is incorrect.
Big Twitter names were getting their doe eyed followers to sign up "call them cis until they break" .

Surely after all the years dealing with Jeffree and FFJ and others you know many men hate us and will do anything to shut women up.

Waiting for "sorry we were played by those whose direct aim was to get women silenced. None of the deletions will count as strikes"

A site designed for women becomes anti woman.

Disappointing, MNHQ.

Cis is offensive to many and should be reported as hate speech, then deleted.

Why would women care about the feelings of those who have vowed to erase them? Yet HQ is here supporting them. Nauseatingly woke, HQ.

Madness.

That kind of implies that finding the word "cis" offensive is trans unfriendly

Can I also please ask why fwr regulars are given strikes and deleted for posts even infer the possibility of something but a post using a banned word has been allowed to stand a few hours now.

There are a lot of words that are crucial language for women to be able to describe oppression on a board about women's rights.

Thank you for your reply @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet . May I ask that you update the site rules to include the phrase p**Trans so that new posters don't get caught out by this unwritten rule? It's incredibly unfair to expect new posters to guess at the current mood regarding the political correctness of various terms.

Does having a thread deleted mean an automatic ban despite an almost flawless track record with previous postings? I’ve already been falsely accused of being a PBP (acknowledged by Mumsnet) once before and looks like it’s happened again. It’s getting very tiresome.

I understand what you're saying MNHQ but in this case the poster had come purely to goad and then screenshot it and post all over twitter. At that point surely a line is crossed particularly when many FWR who were pointing out that that was happening were being deleted.

Its no problem to make a mistake, it happens, we know you have a very difficult balancing act but allowing a poster clearly posting in bad faith to keep continuing and post new threads using words that would get regulars banned seems very unfair.