Thread Deleted ( Parts 1,2,3, and 4)

[AnneKipankitoo]

I saw that thread 4 was deleted with the message
about breaking Mumsnet guidelines.
The 3 previous threads were deleted too.

Which guidelines were broken?

We've all been taken in at some point or other, it's no big deal, the story hits the right buttons and it's believed (or not). There's no glory in being right and no punishment for being gullible - but if it keeps happening then that's for the person who keeps falling for it to look at why that is.

The "husband" was believable enough; it was the OP whose response was implausible. She turned into more of a doormat the worse he got, presumably because she knew she'd get more responses from people trying to persuade her to see her own worth and leave him that way. There was nothing realistic in her response to it all either, none of the genuine distress markers, just faux naievety.

I'm amazed it took so long to get the threads taken down.
A lot of posters were dubious by thread 2 and, having previously supported the OP, I saw through it part way through thread 3 and reported it. I know other posters were also reporting the threads and said MN had told them it was a genuine poster
It makes me really mad when people are genuinely concerned for a poster and yet they are being taken for a ride.

But she led a sheltered life you see....
(Her actual words) 🫠

Honestly, who doesn't know Viagra! 😅

You literally could see tens of posters calling it out and those posts being deleted and other posters saying that we were mean for calling it out, so yes I absolutely believe it. There were lots of people also reporting, myself included but I knew they wouldn't remove it while it drove so much traffic and had so many clicks.

But yes it was very obvious and I remember seeing a few posters that have said so here, saying the same on the threads.

It was so clear it was fake because the drama kept ramping up, the stories getting more elaborate and obvious (oh what could this blue pill possibly be, oh why on earth would a massage place use bitcoin, why would he disappear to a strip club) complete with faux naivety and continuously saying oh but I may stay with him, just to cue all the posters pointing out all the obvious issues. It was very very obvious and I'm sure MN could see that too, but the clicks a 4 thread drama bought in I'm sure added to why it was so slow to remove and was only done when the interest died down as more realised it was utter crap.

See, I don't understand the rationale behind this particular rule: am I missing some very obvious reason?

It has the potential to detail every single thread. Just report if you think it's fake.

It's been part of MN Talk guidelines since forever - bit unusual but welcome, I think.

Can someone post a link to the tattle chat?

I havent said that it's good that some spotted it nor bad that others didn't so I'm not quite sure what your point is here. But as I said, people still spent time offering advice, some posting quite heavily so put in time and not everyone would spot it, so my point stands that I felt bad for those that did invest the time which is why I reported it. I am sure with all the experience of these threads it becomes more obvious, so MN would surely have known long before thread 4. They are the ones that should have removed it sooner as it was a very obvious one, especially by thread 3.

If I tag @Lavender95 can she see this?

Troll hunting is against the rules but I would love to know how many people actually pressed the report button.

It was so fake but I just stopped reading after part 2 appeared.
I've made reports in the past about obvious fake threads but you get the usual 'looks ok behind the scenes'.

Surely if MN were receiving quite a few reports on this then they would have to pull it. No idea how it got to 4 threads.

These creative writers always jump the shark sooner or later. This is usually the moment of illumination, but as pointing out the fantasy nature of their outputs is verboten, it's the point at which a good many posters will simply disengage. I must admit I was surprised when I saw this had run to four threads.

I post on this site on the understanding that a lot of its content will be made up and take the view that either a thread addresses a point of interest, or it doesn't. And, who knows?, perhaps these threads might help someone else in a similar position.

On the whole I think the site etiquette of not calling out inventive thread creators is wise. Some women post here in genuine distress and are in clearly abusive relationships. More than one has been saved by the supportive advice given on this site over the years. I'd rather be taken in by numerous idiots than have one woman in dire need ending up with that lifeline cut off because it's been wrongly assumed she's bluffing for kicks.

I'm not sure what your point is either? How is MN responsible for posters who are unable to save themselves from wittering on and investing themselves in something that is really obviously (to most), untrue and therefore not worth reading further?

It's up to posters to take precautions for themselves to stop them investing time and effort into nonsense. Or not. They're free to do that but as adults, shouldn't be expecting a nanny on a chatboard.

Would be very interesting to know but something we 100% would never get told

But then you get posters lamenting that they've invested time and effort and the thread wasn't genuine.

It's not within the guidelines to query an OP's thread/post so the only thing that can be done is to back out and just not give it oxygen. I do that so often that I'm mostly removing threads. That's within guidelines and nobody suffers because I'm not on the thread.

I've been caught out with a thread that wasn't genuine before. I shrug it off, give myself a slap and try not to do it again. There are posters who love fiction and drama, they don't care if it has any semblance of truth. There's no helping them.

Yes, I haven't thought about the potential misuse of the "troll hunting" (oh, the irony 😅).
I do my fair share of reportung, it's just that sometimes there are posters who are so obviously dishonestly engaging in a thread that it's frustrating not being able to say it "out loud"...

Yes - and when I get a response of 'We're taking a look at that now', I read that the translation is, 'We know. Stop telling us'.

When you can't warn people because it's seen as troll hunting and you report it only for those many reports to be ignored, then it's annoying

Just because you are savvy and clued up online, you can't assume everyone is. People from all walks of life use this site and some are more vulnerable and do get overly invested. It's exactly how people end up giving money to people on these kinds of sites. So yeah I do think mumsnet have a little bit of responsibility. If they want to put a blanket ban on 'troll hunting' then they could at least try and protect those who may not be quite so clued up, so they dont get sucked in. This time it was just time lost but ive seen it be more in the past and again, when people warned of it they were told not to troll hunt, turns out they were scamming well meaning people.

I believed it to but I wasn't invested in it so not that bothered it wasn't.

I reported it and the reply I got implied a lot had but they had no reason to doubt it and take it down

Yeah that really was improbable! I mean dear God.

constant conveniently prompt updates is always a red flag. I had my doubts

Gutted. After her last post where she said "I just want a fairytale ending like in the movies" I wanted to say "I think you mean a happy ending 😉"
And everyone would have stood up and applauded. Kidding.
I was so annoyed/frusrated with her, and I've met people in those situations who've been as doormatty as her, so I was giving the benefit of the doubt. But I would occasionally say to my husband, "I'm a mug aren't I. This is fake."
Then I'd read on...

I don't know how many times I have mentioned that I've been sucked in myself before? I have. It's annoying, I agree with you. Reporting doesn't mean that it will be deleted (I know that too) but if you're reporting then you know the thread's a scam and you don't keep investing.

It's up to other users to not be perpetually gullible. Or, if they are, then take it on the chin.

This isn't a safe site, none of them are and it's folly to think otherwise or put other people in charge of our safety online.

I
I think for any of us very long term Mners, the username gave it away…

ill have a consonant please Carol.

Yes: this is obvious shorthand for 'we are not going to act on your report'. It happened recently with a post I reported for anti-Semitism - sadly but not surprisingly in today's climate.

I agree, too, with your above post as to individual posters assuming responsiblility for 'investment' in a thread. However well-meaning that investment might be, that's down to them. Posts to the tune of 'Any updates, OP, we are all worried about you!' speak volumes and always raise an eyeroll as far as I'm concerned.

The retreating from the BS approach is one I also frequently use, as I did on the first of these four threads. I do draw attention to the obvious MRAs and fetishists, though. This isn't against talk guidelines as far as I'm aware and this brand of poster is pervading this site to the extent that it's tainting genuine discussion. It's helpful for the uninitiated or unwary to be aware of their presence, IMO.