Have the guidelines changed recently?

[ChangedMyNamrButStillMe]

There seem to be so many deletions on threads these days. I’ve had comments deleted that apparently broke Mumsnet guidelines that would have always stayed in the past - eg someone asked in a fashion thread about some shoes and I said they were “really fucking ugly”. It probably wasn’t a very nice comment but why does that break the guidelines? It’s not a targeted attack, it was an opinion on shoes when someone had asked for an opinion on shoes. I’ve seen loads of other people’s comments deleted in threads and it makes it really hard to follow when they’re being quoted everywhere. Again, not targeted attacks, just something that’s been reported because OP was called unreasonable or similar.

One of the things I always liked about MN was the fact the conversations weren’t tightly monitored like on Reddit or Netmums. It seems to have really changed over the last few months and I’m just wondering the reasoning behind it.

Thanks for the help

I think so. They seem much more willing to delete threads just because the OP doesn't like what they're being told now, too.

That's interesting, @ChangedMyNamrButStillMe , because I got a Mumsnet Swears by email yesterday which quoted what I assume was your post, albeit with an asterisk:

"A can of worms was thoroughly opened this week when 20YAYMAKINGNAHE asked for opinions on these platform sandals from Geox which were variously described as “hideous”, “f*cking ugly”, “like a meringue” and “like two scrunches pulled across a flip flop." Never change Mumsnetters"

So it breaks the guidelines for a post, but not for a site email?

I don't think that the guidelines have actually changed, but I do think there are more deletions. One of my comments was deleted a while ago - for the first time, I think, in well over a decade of MN use. No explanation was given, but a link to the guidelines was provided.

I re-read the guidelines at that time, and am sure that my post hadn't actually broken any of them. I presume another poster had reported it because they didn't like what I was saying, and so MNHQ just zapped it. I did query it on the thread at the time, but didn't get a response.

If the new unwritten rule is that we shouldn't say anything that another poster might not like, then I wish that they would be explicit about that, so that we can all decide whether we want to be on a forum where someone else "being offended" is enough to warrant a deletion. At the same time, if they are going to delete things just because they offend someone, then I wish they could at least do that consistently and zap the many racist, sexist, homophobic and disablist comments that are inexplicably left to stand at the moment.

I hadn't noticed a change in what's deleted. A 'not nice' "they are fucking ugly" would always have been deleted if reported surely .
Maybe more people are reporting? I hope so. I'd prefer the site to be less nasty and aggressive.

Hi @ChangedMyNamrButStillMe we haven't changed the Talk guidelines.

We're not closely monitoring threads - we take a look when posts are reported as breaking the guidelines.

The post was reported as not in the spirit of the site and also a personal attack which derailed the thread because it was directed towards the OP (who was asking what colour a pair of shoes were that she'd selected for her wedding).

@RustyBear The quotes in Swears By refer to a different thread.

Going into much more detail here will make it a thread about a single deletion, but as always, if you have any questions about specific moderation decisions then please email us at contactus @ mumsnet - we're always fine to discuss.

Sounds like a reasonable deletion to me. Too many posters who come on threads to make unnecessarily aggressive and rude comments just because they can. Sounds like OP wasn’t even asking for advice on whether the shoes were nice or not.

'not in the spirit of the site' and 'personal attack' - I don't agree that the shoes comment was either of those things. I hate it when MN drags that out an an excuse.