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?

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

You're not wrong @WanderinWomb but it's safe to say we'll be waiting a mighty long time!

Does having a thread deleted mean an automatic ban

I don't think so.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Does having a thread deleted mean an automatic ban

I don't think so.

No IME it doesn't

And posting to,goad it not always deleted - even when MNHQ agree that it is happening (eg on some of the threads in the Royal Family) they do not always delete/ban

I support what @MNHQ has posted on this thread.

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.

It's a crucial in terms of language for women friendly voices to be able to accurately explain why they view the risk of men who identify as women as exactly the same as those who don't.

A major concession to this was accepting that some of these individuals had a trans identity, even though many women not only don't subscribe to it, but find it sexist.

Hence the term 'TIM'. A term that includes an acknowledgment that the person has a transgender identity, but is not only accurate, but is used to demonstrate why sex is important as a marker.

If someone is using cis because it is a 'crucial piece of language' for them, can the same courtesy please be extended to women regarding TIM.

The problem with not allowing new posters to post is that the numerous women who have namechanged for whatever reason will also be affected...many have been on here for years . It does seem like double standards are being applied to strikes and deletions. And that certain people are overprotected.

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"

Jesus. Who wants to be associated with that? Soreen??

It's a crucial in terms of language for women friendly voices to be able to accurately explain why they view the risk of men who identify as women as exactly the same as those who don't

It is gobsmacking that on a women's site this is ignored.

And I will be disgusted if Datun's use of the 'T word' causes a deletion when posters have boasted on twitter that they are only coming to MN to cause trouble when posters such as Datun have been around for years and contributed to the broader MN community.

Yes Datun plus if it is so important for the “trans friendly people” to use the terms they want when experiencing hostility, what about the hostility we, mothers, lesbians ,feminists, women experience. Or has that stopped mattering?

Yeah, I think it probably has actually :(

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,

Do you recognise that women also have some crucial pieces of language?

Personally I wouldn't have a problem with permitting cis, as long as the corresponding restrictions are lifted the other way, and women can freely call "transwomen" men, or at least the more neutral TIMs. I think everyone should be able to choose their own terminology.

Preventing "cis" was part of the quid pro quo for preventing women from using their own crucial language - an agreement each side would use avoid terminology the other was uncomfortable with.

Most users are not particularly interested in arbitrarily restricting speech here, but if it is going to be prevented, the restrictions have to be balanced - and based on some consistent principle.

AuntieStella

Ereshkigalangcleg
Does having a thread deleted mean an automatic ban

I don't think so.
No IME it doesn't

Thanks both ... looks like I’ve yet again been mistakenly banned for being a PBP. Can’t even be arsed trying to sort it out.

Can't say I disagree with Mumsnet reply... To posts made me in good faith. I don't think anyone on FWR objects to having differing opinions on the board at all. Healthy debate is good when all sides remain respectful.

HOWEVER the same OP yesterday started 3 threads on the same topic within a short space. She admitted freely on one of them she was there to goad responses for Twitter screenshots, at that point all posts should have been taken down.

On the cis thread she used cis in an inflammatory way. Something along the lines of "I don't care what you think I'll continue to call you all cis" after repeatedly being asked not to address posters with the term as it's offensive. She continued to call certain posters cis against their wishes, despite it being pointed out that she was misgendering them - something she complained about happening to her very early on in the post (an accusation levelled specifically at me, despite my replies not referring to anyone's gender least of all hers). Yet I had a post deleted for using the term TRA as some people may find it offensive?!

It's all over her Twitter that she was using us as an experiment, and she tagged several prominent TRA/MRA Twitter accounts to incite a pile on. All of her threads were "not in the spirit" and regular users of MN have been sanctioned for much lesser crimes.

Agree with Glam.

It feels like abuse.

Most users are not particularly interested in arbitrarily restricting speech here, but if it is going to be prevented, the restrictions have to be balanced - and based on some consistent principle.

Exactly.

@WoolOfBat

To be fair, I think MNHQ did their very best on this. They are walking a very fine line and they are keeping the discussion open.

It is hard to straight out judge someone and declare them a troll - and a lying troll at that as the OP of the threads swore that all was done in good faith. I am not sure that it is a decision a legal entity can make. Unfortunately the cynics were right.

But please MNHQ could the regulars who were clearly goaded and provoked quietly be re-instated / having their strikes removed. I believe that this was an exceptional situation and the frustration boiled over for some women here.

We are all at a breaking point due to the pandemic and the women on the FWR board are more likely to be dealing with both ageing parents and small children than any Internet warrior. To then have something you care about so deeply as women’s right and feel that you tying yourself in linguistic knots against an insincere poster who not only is lying about their intentions but also takes pleasure in using words like “cis” when knowing how offensive some find that...is hard.

Please MNHQ could we all learn from this, share some and and move on together?

Great post @WoolOfBat

I agree with every word of it (and your subsequent ones)

And thanks @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet

The reason that thread went to 1k posts so quickly is that many women on Mumsnet strongly object to having the label "cis" forced on them. I think if you respect preferred pronouns and delete "misgendering" you should also respect that women who don't share the ideological view of gender identity trumping biological sex, and in fact see it as harmful and misogynistic, do not want to be labelled with terms they don't accept as correct.

Since when has TRA been banned speak?

Good grief, @MNHQ get a grip.

Why was my post deleted?

@Radio4Rocks

Since when has TRA been banned speak?

Good grief, @MNHQ get a grip.

I don't think it has, has it? I can see that it might be removed if it was addressed directly to a poster, eg "You're a TRA". I have no idea if this was what happened though.

@Radio4Rocks

Since when has TRA been banned speak?

Good grief, @MNHQ get a grip.

Apparently I used it in a derogatory manner by pointing out that it seemed like the TRA's were trying to goad GC posters into a gotcha moment they could post to Twitter... Because that definitely didn't happen did it

I think it's another T word endeing with M. Also a truncation of a boy's name.

Surely not. Not when "they " is deemed as generalisation and banned/deleted. I mean how do we define who we are talking about then given alot of the time we aren't even talking about trans people necessarily.. so we can't generalise but can't define the cohort of people we are discussing...how does that work?

Is anyone else reminded of the original Spartacus threads?

Yes.