Displaying member join dates

[Cornettoninja]

I know part of the attraction of MN is the ability to name change to keep things ultra anonymous but I would like to see a vague join date displayed next to posters names (month/year).

Particularly with contentious subjects like brexit, covid etc. It’s obvious that there are posters here to do nothing but agitate and then move on. It happens so often that a poster will start a subject then disappear in to the ether leaving everyone squabbling. It’s a documented problem everywhere on the net that interested parties pay people or develop bots to do precisely that.

I feel quite strongly that displaying a join date and leaving the name change facility alone would at least help posters judge whether they wanted to engage or not. I know some posters have concerns about new members been treated differently vs older members but I really feel that the positives outweigh the negatives in this situation and the majority of MN users aren’t twatty enough to make an issue of it.

It would also have the benefit of stopping people feeling like they have to ‘prove’ themselves by listing well known threads after a name change.

I’m just tired of the obviousness manipulation and propaganda going on with no way to judge before engaging. MN is such a well known, high traffic site that it’s always going to be a target. It’s not really fair that users have to rely on arbitrary ‘troll spotting’ skills.

I don't support this.

It's probably not a problem if you joined in recent years when the site was growing rapidly. But if you've been around for yonks, it's a bit more identifying.

And it doesn't matter when someone joined really - if you think they're posting in a goading fashion, report to MNHQ who will take a look.

And accept that people have differing views, and that both long standing and newer members can have opinions you dislike. And are as free to post them as you are free to post yours

There’s also the fact that even just the join date might make someone identifiable through a name change. I guess just the year might be ok. But if someone joined ages ago, like 2000 and is still here there won’t be many people with that as a join date. Then all it takes is someone to think “that writing style looks like x”, realise both usernames are 2000 and guess it’s probably the same person.

Could have a "new poster" something for a couple of months or so?

I disagree with a month/year identifier. It'll make staying anonymous rather difficult the longer you've been around because cross referencing users against month/year will be a pretty easy way of linking a poster with old usernames.

However, I would support a system similar to some social media where you get a "I'm new" flag for the first 6 months or so.

Removes the "first time poster" insults/troll hunting and protects anonymity far better.

Perhaps just a star which indicates approx length of time. Such a platinum, gold, silver bronze for different length of time.

And accept that people have differing views, and that both long standing and newer members can have opinions you dislike. And are as free to post them as you are free to post yours

But I’m not talking about a clash of opinions I’m talking about targeted campaigns designed to sway opinion. Facebook and Twitter have both got policies for flagging spreading of misinformation and I don’t think MN’s current policy of ‘report and we’ll take a look’ is as effective as it could be. MN isn’t an obscure little website, it’s a highly trafficked forum that’s very attractive to people looking for an audience.

It’s basically completely unregulated advertising/marketing and I’d quite like to have a way of protecting myself without having to report very loose suspicions based on nothing more than a hunch.

Displaying join dates is at least one way of highlighting whether an inflammatory post (on literally any subject) is worth engaging with or not. It doesn’t do much in isolation but like a lot of things there needs to be more than one strategy to be effective.

Not everyone will agree about what's inflammatory

And if you don't think an iffy post is worth reporting, then of course MNHQ can't act on it

Maybe a new user badge for the first few days?

A "Hello, I'm new!" flag is a good idea. Both because it can help us recognise when someone is simply unaware of or misunderstanding MN conventions, and because it can be a heads-up to posters that they might be addressing an invasion of inflammatory ploppers.

@AuntieStella

Not everyone will agree about what's inflammatory

And if you don't think an iffy post is worth reporting, then of course MNHQ can't act on it

That’s kind of my point tbh. The kind of posting I’m talking about is insidious by its nature and intent. As it’s becoming more common and known about then at what point does a forum become somewhere that people treat other posters as insincere and completely change the tone and purpose of the space? We can all follow the basic ‘don’t trust anyone on the internet to be who they say they are’ but that doesn’t work for the nature of methods currently being utilised which are aimed psychologically rather than cat fishing or conning an individual . It’s incredibly clever.

If we’re going to keep name changing (which I’m in favour of fwiw) then what other information can MNetters go by to protect themselves here? At least FB and Twitter offer the opportunity to look at a users history to draw a conclusion which can’t be done with the prevalence of name changing here.

Currently MN isn’t much more secure from that POV than 4chan; I’d expect them to aim higher than that tbh.

I agree with PP , a 'I am new ' type of flag would be better perhaps their name in a different colour for the 1st month .
I know there is Newbies corner but how many of you go and have a look at it ?
Or perhaps allowing new member to only create one new thread per day or reply on threads a set amount of times per day , I don't know how many would be fair for that though ( 20 ? )

And don’t let newbies revive zombie threads!

All that would happen is that they would simply register new names every so often, wait a year or two, post the odd innocuous comment a few times, and bingo.

It's what some of them do (looking at you, journos) anyway.

I'm not too fussed either way but I wouldn't want a 'newbie's' opinion to be mocked and dismissed simply because the join date is recent. I can just see posters goading a new poster or using the start against them.
I know some other forums do this though.

Definitely keep the name changing though, many of us rely on it as a way to get advice on serious matters or support without being outed.

@ExcusesAndAccusations ,
There is a good idea on on Site stuff about Zombie threads a poster suggested MNHQ put a note at the top of a zombie thread to let posters know they are trying to resurrect a dead thread but I dont know if MNHQ are going to do it

Perhaps basing something on passing a minimum number of posts might be less identifiable than dates as long as it didn't show the exact number

E.g. LApprentiSorcier (100+ posts)

That would get round the idea of journalists joining and biding their time before posting.

That’s an interesting idea @LApprentiSorcier. There’s still the weakness that someone is committed enough to post randomly to build up their posts but it would weed out the impatient

I like this idea. How about showing the year of joining for the last 5 years and anything over than show 5+ years to help keep it anonymous?

OfDragonsDeep (Member for 5+ years)

[quote AlCalavicci]@ExcusesAndAccusations ,
There is a good idea on on Site stuff about Zombie threads a poster suggested MNHQ put a note at the top of a zombie thread to let posters know they are trying to resurrect a dead thread but I dont know if MNHQ are going to do it[/quote]
There is already a warning (in red) in the message box for old threads but it disappears after the first person makes a new post years later.

It is often spam posts that resurrect an old thread, the spam post gets deleted but everyone else piles in with their response to the OP and ignores all the other posters pointing out that it is a zombie thread.

Lots of people have more than one account or change accounts so it wouldn't actually be that accurate.

My current account will tell you I have been a member for a few months. Reality is I've been on Mumsnet for 17 years.

I'm not unusual.

@TalktotheFoot

All that would happen is that they would simply register new names every so often, wait a year or two, post the odd innocuous comment a few times, and bingo.

It's what some of them do (looking at you, journos) anyway.

I agree that would happen but there’s no one strategy that would be 100% watertight.

What sparked my concern to start this thread was reading an article on how there appears to be a relatively thriving black market selling accounts with a history for popular social media sites. Introducing something like I’ve suggested would open up MN to that kind of thing but it also highlighted to me exactly how easy it is for MN to be targeted with little to no obstacles.

I’m just not sure that it’s best practice/safe to keep name changing (which again I support) without having any other safeguards in place.

Relying on users to spot and report suspect posters doesn’t seem particularly watertight either and subject to a very wide interpretation of what ‘suspect’ is. I also dislike the rhetoric around troll spotting which isn’t particularly welcoming anyway or the open exasperation displayed because people ‘fall for it’. It’s necessary but not everyone has the skill or inclination to dissect someone’s post/prose. I just think that there needs to be more information available of some description for posters to form an opinion about their own online security.

A combination of length of time AND number of posts could work perhaps.
So an 'I'm new' for less than 6 months OR fewer than say 200 posts.

I agree that Zombie threads should stay flagged for more than just one post, or even only be allowed to be unlocked by the original poster.

Hi OP

Many thanks for the suggestion.

We want to keep Mumsnet a comfortable space for everyone. We do think categorising people by membership time has the potential to separate newer posters.

We're really not keen on a tier system of any sort, we do like a level playing field.

Thanks for the feedback though, we're always happy to listen and pass it forward.

It used to be possible, I hadn't realised it was no longer an option.
You could set in your profile to show the year of joining. (2007)

@Newnamefor2021

Perhaps just a star which indicates approx length of time. Such a platinum, gold, silver bronze for different length of time.

Yes and while we're at it, let's use diamonds to indicate MN Royalty posters. As if we don't get enough of "I've been on MN for 200 years. I'm so wise, me" posts.

Excellent post, LilyMumsnet.