The Sex topic - an update on moderation

[YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet]

Hi everyone.

Thanks for all your comments over the past week regarding the Sex board. It’s become clear from the discussion that we needed a rethink about our approach to this part of the site and so we’re going to introduce some rules to help ensure that posters can get the support and advice they need from the board and that everyone has clear expectations of the behaviour we expect.

Posters must be at least 18 years of age - Mumsnet has always been a site for adults but we want to be crystal clear about this for this board.

The board is text based - we don’t allow NSFW (not safe for work) images.

We don’t allow links to any NSFW sites or personal profiles on other sites

We will not tolerate creepy or harassing behaviour in particular from male posters

We’ve also had concerns raised about the ongoing ‘sex chat threads’ including the risks involved with allowing users to PM each other. Our approach has always been to allow consenting adults to make their own judgement when it comes to what they’ll share and, broadly, that is still the case across the site - but we acknowledge there are additional vulnerabilities here that we ought to consider.

With that in mind, we will no longer allow users to ask for or to offer to send PMs for the purposes of sex chat. For one thing, we can’t guarantee that the person you’re chatting with is who they say they are and we can’t realistically safeguard these kind of off-board discussions. We’ve looked at the moderation principles of similar boards on other sites and this is indeed the policy on several others.

We’d also like to address some of your other comments if we may. Last year we reduced the time required from joining to posting on Sex from 90 days to seven. We’ve no plans to change this at the moment because this timeframe has proved to be a sufficient deterrent to bad actors and we believe that 90 days is too long if you’re a new user with a genuine concern. We’d also like to be clear that our commercial partnerships have had zero bearing on any changes we’ve made (nor did anyone ask us to make changes) and MNHQ does not (and would never) post affiliate links to products under the guise of a regular MNer. We may be many things, but we are not underhand!

As with everything, we’ll continue to monitor the situation and we hope these new rules will go some way to reassure you. If anyone has further questions, please post here and we’ll do our best to answer them.

Thanks.

And in the absence of that stop claiming that NSFW content is adults only.

You don't need to log in to read the supposedly "adults only" content on the sex topic so claims about it being adults only are utterly meaningless. The content appears via Google searches and clicking on the link takes you straight in.

@LucyLeave would that really prevent someone underage from accessing the content though? I know I totally get on your nerves but I’m not actually the opposition. I don’t want young kids reading/seeing inappropriate stuff online either!

But sometimes, children whose parents have had their eyes open to Reddit and blocked it effective immediately, do know that their parents’ MN account has some ‘juicy grown up stuff’ on it. As I’ve mentioned before I’ve been around a while, I’ve seen teenagers of innocent MNers hijack their accounts and ask all sorts of dodgy stuff. I’m not saying it’s rife but if it happens, so if it happens in this scenario it will become known sooner or later that it’s easy to access and request ‘extreme’ content amongst young people, and that could create a whole new wave of trouble. It needs to be shut down before it starts I think, by restricting access here, now.

@AGreenProblem MN know their stuff, I have faith in their decisions

Their decisions haven't exactly been on the ball lately as far as sex stuff goes.
I have less faith, unfortunately.

I do feel that there is a very tricky balance between allowing a space where people can talk about and receive advice and support around CSA and wider safe guarding concerns of any mention of CSA.

I think a careful and considered case by case basis by HQ is the most sensible approach and users can flag up anything they suspect of being questionable anywhere on the forum.

Considering neither of the threads highlighted in this and associated threads were posted on the sex board but are being repeatedly used as a stick to beat it with makes no sense.

I think there should be a zero tolerance for csa threads and threads like the previous one where someone was talking about their under 18 Yr olds sex life on the sex board but in relationships or a suitable board they should be modded on a case by case basis.

I have no problem with the sex board in general now that the sex chat thread is gone, there clearly are a few old pervs there but mostly it seems to be populated by lonely people and those with serious hang ups about sex that can't communicate with their partners, I don't think that they pose much of a risk to the tone of mumsnet in general. If the sex board makes them feel better then each to their own really.

@CrotchetyCrocheting I think it's true that many people struggle to talk openly about what to many is a very important part of their lives and that's sad.

The fear of shaming and belittling is a very big part of that

'but mostly it seems to be populated by lonely people and those with serious hang ups about sex that can't communicate with their partners,'

Oh stop being so sneery snd snooty. People are not necessarily 'lonely' because they post on mn and newsflash many people have hang ups, or problems, regarding sex. You only have to read the many, many threads about sad, sexless marriages.

There is nothing wrong with asking for help you must stop shaming people.

Huh? I literally said if it makes people feel better to post about it each to their own. I'm not saying they are lonely just because they post on mumsnet, Im saying they are lonely based off their posts. It's clear that lots of people have hang ups, I'm glad you agree, are you shaming people too by agreeing Weirdly aggressive post Janiie but pop off if it makes you feel better!

They don't need to "know". Google will find it - a google search on key words appearing in some of the recent sex topic threads takes you straight to an MN link and from the link you are straight into the content.

No need to log in, no need to traverse an NSFW label, not even a clearly worded message - if you happen to notice the small greyish sentence at the top of the page it doesn't anywhere mention age or age restrictions, just a twee mention of "grown ups" in the middle of a wordy paragraph.

So my question remains @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet - how will MN be implementing "Posters must be at least 18 years of age - Mumsnet has always been a site for adults but we want to be crystal clear about this for this board"?

I'd also be interested to hear what progress has been made on the enhanced moderation of the sex topic, particularly with respect to CSA.

'I'd also be interested to hear what progress has been made on the enhanced moderation of the sex topic, particularly with respect to CSA.'

They've said repeatedly posts will be assessed on a case by case scenario, just report anything you see that you feel is off.

The sex topic is people asking for advice with a bit of light hearted chat inbetween, it isn't wasn't wall to wall pornography. I've no idea why some of you are so bothered by it.

Nope, it was strongly implied that a more proactive or enhanced process would be used. If that is not the case then the statement needs amending.

There was also a question about whether modding that topic would be optional for mods, considering mods don't have the option to hide stuff. Not seen that answered.

Rather like the extra crystal clarity about age - fine words, butter and parsnips spring to mind.

Why does people keep going on about mods. Mumsnet isn't moderated. You have to report shit