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.

It will be because they've spent a significant amount of money on it. It's not going anywhere.

Never got an answer on what UX has been done. I do find it interesting how many companies don’t do it and then find they’ve introduced something that, um, just doesn’t work for users.

I don’t think they have spent a significant amount of money on it… but it’s an easy way to bump up numbers when telling sponsors of what a successful site it is in terms of page views and reach

Even the crappy implementation will have cost them a good amount to either develop in-house or purchase.

Either way they're not going to chuck it.

I think I have the solution. I’ve asked how to make this better in Chat and checked what came up in the popular and helpful suggested threads

Take your pick…

Boiling a ham for 3 days in cola.

Inflating a burst tyre with a straw.

Using chuddy to hang a mirror.

A pea - the new MN chicken?

1993 - only 6 more years til I can dance like it is 1999 - can’t wait.

Problem solved. Probably….

If they have they should be asking for a refund PDQ!

@ArcaneWireless stop it 🤣

Thanks for moving it below the reply box at least, MMHQ. Less scrolling and fewer accidental clicks is a start.

A flounce? 😂😂 how did you ever get MN as big as it is with this attitude?

Genuine question to any other @mnhq person watching this thread since Justine has spat her dummy out and ran away, why are these new features pushed when they’re CLEARLY not functional? It took fucking ages for the new and shiny website to work properly. Now creating an algorithm that gets it right every time is tricky is certainly true, but it appears that it’s not getting it right at all. Why are you refusing to answer what UX dev/testing has been done? You refused to answer this when you rolled the website out too… is it because the answer is fuck all?

oh and the whole “algorithm” thing taking context into the equation? Yeah, you might need to work on that as there is no way the circled thread should be recommended when viewing a thread about racism …

@HereComeTheGrannies OMG, cringe!

Where do people get off speaking like this. No one owes you any answers. If I was a mod I certainly wouldn’t respond to rude, demanding posts like this fgs.

I find the suggestions quite funny tbh.
Peps things up a bit.

@JustineMumsnet We'll will also introduce two new setting in Customise
One to turn off seeing Similar Threads at all and one which ensures you only see threads in Active that have been started within the last 30 days. We're aiming to release both of these changes in the next week or so. Thanks for your input and for your patience.

Is that before or after the Edit Function which you said was under development and on its way last year...?

Hear hear @ShirleyPhallus ! Appalling way to address anyone.
And I hate the new feature.

Oh dear. @HereComeTheGrannies I think you need to take a chill pill dude!

@BruceAndNosh That's a good question. Where is the edit function? 😀 It seems to have been in the works since 2020 (or perhaps even longer) but still hasn't been implemented.

I just read this article about a new BBC documentary about disordered eating (and social media) and it very much seems to suggest that on social media on difficult subjects, similar threads- type recommendations for more content by algorithm can be very unhelpful for vulnerable people.

Zara McDermott: ‘I considered deleting social media after learning impact on disordered eating’
www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/88b8852b-79ec-4821-a7c3-01dd8bf3e245

‘Zara also believes social media companies need to do more to combat the promotion of eating disorder content on their platforms, including by users who use coded terms to evade existing content bans.
With TikTok especially, she says, “you can get yourself into a real hole and the algorithm can really start to suggest posts that you might like based on your searches. It's almost a bit of a trap.”
A TikTok spokesperson said: “We care deeply about the health and well-being of our community. We do not allow content depicting, promoting, normalising, or glorifying disordered eating, however we do support members of our community sharing their personal experiences with these issues in a safe way to raise awareness and find support.”’

I think David Baddiel made the same point in his documentary on social media @PalatineHill . His daughter has suffered from eating disorders and she talked about the impact of social media algorithms on her disease.

Thanks tribpot I hadn’t seen that.

It just seems that algorithms used in online content created by and for potentially vulnerable people, (which obviously applies to MN which is all about supporting parents) would need to have specific limitations applied so as not to exacerbate anyone’s problems.

But as others have said on this thread, potentially any area of MN or keyword could involve something sensitive. And algorithms really aren’t sensitive enough to make those distinctions and judgements.

So there’s a few different user experience reasons why I think a ‘Similar threads’ feature is a bad idea, but this specific type of effect seems worrying. Other online platforms show that this sort of feature could nudge vulnerable posters’ problems to get worse. I don’t think many of us on here would want our previous threads or old posts to contribute to that. It just seems better not to have the Similar threads feature at all.

People can still use search with the keywords of their choice but that is different from an online platform officially recommending specific similar threads.

There’s an AIBU thread at the moment from a woman who is very unhappy about being ‘fat’.

One of the similar thread recommendations is ‘AIBU to think people dislike me because I’m fat?’

So yes this is definitely a case where an algorithm is potentially putting an unhappy and vulnerable woman (and others) down an eating-related rabbit hole. It’s really quite irresponsible.

Why won’t you answer the question about why this “useful” feature does not appear in Site Stuff?

it could actually assist folk who are experiencing difficulties with functionality

But… We know you don’t want to draw more attention to things that are broken on MN, so why not admit it, instead of ignoring the question?

If you must have links on the page, why not just link to the most recent page on that board?

Then the 33K people could click on real-time discussions instead of reviving zombies.

This thread has 91% saying “no”

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4682399-should-mnhq-keep-the-similar-threads-feature