What is this ‘You might also like’ clutter?

[PalatineHill]

Hi MNHQ. Please just take it out. Or let me opt out of it? It looks a mess.

If here’s something that I might also like to read, I’ll find it by using the search function.
These suggestions are just encouraging the posting of the same points on multiple similar threads, and that will discourage healthy normal thread death.

It’s really distracting to look at visually, I really liked the uncluttered ‘clean’ MN format compared to other forums.

On trending right now:

To be disappointed that my child is not clever? 138
Whichusername · 21/09/2014 13:16

On that note, I'm going to go spend my Sunday doing something more productive than reading threads from 8 years ago.

Thanks Mumsnet HQ 👍

Ah just what new people to the site want. Spammy free money links. 😂

Not only does this show how an algorithm doesn't work on a site like MN, it doesn't help in the supposed aim of the new feature which I believe was

showing similar threads improves that experience, as it makes it more likely they'll find the answer to their query - and it's being used a lot so we do think it's a useful feature.

No doubt MNHQ will tweak it a bit more and exclude promo codes and bargains.

Is this dress OK for a wedding - wedding was in flipping July. Resurrected.

And another one

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4520929-WHSmith-trendy-stationary-around-2000

From April this year. 😔

I know how this is going to sound, but I'm going to say it anyway. When I started posting on MN, which was probably in 2011 (gulp), I just spent a bit of time browsing the site to get an idea of what it was like and how it was organised, and then I made an account and started posting. It's not rocket science. Why does anybody need signposting to any of the content? It's already organised in topics.

MNHQ, the ‘Similar threads’ thing can be really insensitive and inappropriate on what is a support site for a lot of posters- the feature could cause a lot more harm than good for some people. An algorithm can never grasp the massively important nuances of how people use language. Whatever its makers are claiming.

Today on a Chat thread called ‘the unsung bravery of childless mothers’, an OP who sounded pretty devastated was posting saying she was seeking support about being childless not by choice, seeking a discussion to comfort herself and maybe connect with others. I noticed that the similar threads suggested to that thread were:

‘Women who don’t want kids’

and

‘Why do disillusioned mothers herd their daughters into marriage and babies?’

Both of these are massively inappropriate recommendations and could be potentially upsetting for anyone in the situation described in the OP.

Here’s the OP for the top ‘Similar’ recommendation: www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4670500-women-who-dont-want-kids

Is it just me.. or do women who don't want children constantly go on about how much they don't want children? Nothing against it at all, each to their own and I'm sure I've read that single, childless women are the happiest people which makes sense 😂 but why do they always feel the need to talk about how much they don't want kids??

I haven't rtft but was coming to this board to complain about this new feature. Specifically that you have to scroll past it in order to post on a thread. Very irritating and on fast moving threads, e.g. where posters are watching something on live TV, it's especially annoying. At the very least move it to below the posting box and before Trending. This would be a better layout for me on an android phone.

I lurked for a good few months before plucking up courage to actually post something.

Specifically that you have to scroll past it in order to post on a thread.

Yes! This is massively annoying! On my phone, the reply box isn't even visible unless I scroll. I mentioned before that I thought I must have been logged out because the reply box 'wasn't there'.

It's ridiculous placement.

This example is absolutely disgraceful, the poor OP seeing that on her thread. You can’t get any more insensitive than that @JustineMumsnet
An algorithm causing old threads = extremely annoying
An algorithm causing totally unrelated threads = extremely annoying
An algorithm causing the above example = disgusting and harmful

No matter how much evidence is presented they're set in their view and won't change, so it's pointless doing all their analysis for them.

They don’t care. Or they think their reasoning is far more valid than ours. Either way, if they were bothered enough, it would have been disposed off by now with an apology.

Has my 9 year old been punished enough? asked a mum seeking immediate advice.

In March.

I rather imagine that's been resolved by now, one way or another.

The algorithm is idiotic, it seems to just pick one word and not even look at what topic the threads are in e.g. in Elderly Parents a thread about someone's elderly mother's small appetite has suggested 'similar' threads from Parenting about babies with small or large appetites.

Just chiming in to say I hate this too.

‘Similar threads’ thing can be really insensitive and inappropriate on what is a support site for a lot of posters

Agree

I’ve noticed this several times

The whole idea is crap, sorry MN

It’s still making me laugh. I’m on a thread about I’m a Celeb and it’s suggesting a similar thread is one about who will win Wimbledon.

It seems ridiculous that regular users could predict how this function might cause problems (and distress) but MNHQ and the techies couldn't.

And as someone upthread pointed out, the % of zombies in active will vary for every user depending how we use active convos and how many boards we have hidden from active. Regulars are probably more likely to have more boards hidden from active, and hidden boards are more likely to be either specific interest or tumbleweedy boards which are proportionately less likely to generate many zombies, so if you count all of those in the zombies in active % figures then it will show lower than if it was done by how we actually use active.

As someone, like many, who's been here a lot of years and produced useful content, it does feel like a kick in the teeth to be ignored in favour of welcoming newbies. And it's patronising to newcomers who really don't need special treatment, if the content is good they'll want to join. And pissing off your content producers seems a bit short-sighted.

This thread has been going for days and the noncommittal responses to actual tangible examples people have raised feel like talking to managers at work tbh. I know we don’t have any right to expect more from a privately owned business, but in this case, I kind of do..

So, is the idea to piss off the existing user base, in hopes that passing traffic makes a few misguided clicks on threads from 2014 and it looks as if the site is more active, to please advertisers? That's what I've gleaned, so far.

HQ, there is right now a very distressed post from a parent-carer at the end of their rope, looking for support.

Not only are they now even more upset and ashamed because someone has requested a trigger warning on their thread, but at the foot of their thread this parent now has a list running of suggested linked threads:

Am I bad parent?
Am I terrible?
Am I a bad mum?

This is an awful thing for a distressed parent to have to see on their thread! It's distressing enough to see being done to her, it must be infinitely worse for her.

I have pressed the ‘suggestions’ a few times now in error when scrolling down to post. And once on purpose thinking it was the newer thread.

I can maybe see the joy of it if you are looking for what to do with potato, an egg and a swede or suggestions for a handbag or winter coat but…

If you are going to keep it, please don’t put it between the thread and the posting box.

You say that @ArcaneWireless but I was reading a thread about improving swede and one of the suggested threads was one about swaddling. Super useful

don’t give a shit what we think or want though do you @mnhq @justinemumsnet - you couldn’t have made that any more obvious really. How long will it be before we see another begging “keeping the lights on” post because your regular users have all fucked off

Swaddled swede?

something to put in the manger for the nativity I suppose 🥴

If the problem is the lack of new content being produced, and how advertisers are measuring that, then why not have a look at why that is? Why not ask us why fewer posters are starting new threads that prove to be popular / have longevity / have the qualities needed? Why not ask about security worries, the blatant tabloid steals, and the 'feel' of the new platform?

Why pretend that linking to 9 year old Maisie's screaming fit in March is any kind of business solution?

I've a suggestion - Why don't the existing posters, the long term posters, search the boards for the most idiotic and unrelatable posts and resurrect them? Go back years if you can, and to hell with the Zombie nature of the threads, just bounce them back up to trending?

As MN don't appear to give a shit about what happens on their board, why the hell should we?