Banned for calling out dogwhistling posts

[DebbieHurry]

Yesterday, there was yet another dogwhistlng, vague post on the lines of " Should I send my kids back to school in September? Social media warns of a terrorist attack". This is about the 5th such post in the last 10 days. All by posters spreading panic and fear. I have reported in the past and MN has ignored it. Posts continue to mushroom.

Yesterday, I posted telling people not to get news from Tiktok and pointed out that there have been a spate of such posts.
My posts were deleted, and then my account was banned. My previous username was @KateMiskin.

Could @MN please explain why they allow blatant scaremongering and dogwhistling on a parenting site when the police commissioner has urged people not to spread rumours? And why my account was deleted? I said nothing offensive or that broke the rules. I have been a member for over 20 years.

As said on another thread, it's like whack--mole

Yes, they're provocateurs. Difficult to ignore them by not responding as they're quite skilled at poking the sensitive parts so people react. It's carbon copy 1930sq but social media has spread it like a hideous infection.

£££

The conversations happening on mumsnet mirror the conversations happening up and down the country. Immigration, integration, flags etc is an enormous topic to the general public at the moment so of course it's going to be discussed in a forum that allows people to post about what they like.

If you want to set up a forum that only allows people that agree with you and bans anyone that posts differently go do that.

Who has said that they only want posters who agree with them?

That would be pretty boring imo, and I wouldn't want that at all. But I would like to see fewer blatantly racist posts and less disinformation. Wouldn't you @Winter2020?

This is about people spreading racial hatred and outright lies.

This is not about "not agreeing".

But that is the argument often made by people who want to spread the poison.

I am always up for a ruck, if someone wants to disagree with me then Bring. It. On.

But I object to people posting racist comments and disinformation. As we all should.

You are talking about echo chambers while wanting topics and posts to be removed if you don't approve of them.

There is already a system where racist posts can be reported or removed.

You appear to have missed the entire point of this thread where disinformation and racism is being reported but not removed.

I guess you don't do much reporting of racism if you haven't experienced it.

So far on this thread :

People that aren't radical left wing are :
-Automatically racist
-are thick as pig shit
-Spreading poison

That's just this page that I've skim read.
And you wonder why you're banned ? It's stirring up hatred and vitriol.

I've been on the threads I think you're referring to. Any posts that are in poor taste were removed. Right wing views were not (and rightly so. We live in a democracy)

I saw no racism. Just people concerned about mass asylum seekers with various reasons given for that concern. Many people thought their views were valid. You may not. That's ok. But it doesn't mean you have the right to cancel their opinion because you don't like it.

If posters on here are calling people "thick as pig shit " and insulting their intelligence level because they hold opposing views- well that is delete worthy.

Yesterdays thread bullying an OP into divorcing her husband and letting her children be products of a broken home because he had different views was a particularly shameful advertisement for the liberals.

Radical left wing?

I know. I wish people would learn what the terms they use mean.

More from this thread :
-"fascists" (for liking the flags being up)
-"not clever"

• unintelligent

-Haters -Racists

All because people on those thread had an opposing view point.

Again. Another insult.

Absolutely 100% agree with you.

Bit like "racist" isn't it ?

I was giving her the benefit of the doubt.

No

You mean legitimate concern

You're patronising her and implying she's thick.

I know what racist means.

Back to the old modus operandi I see. Insult flinging, sarcasm, passive aggression.

No you have inferred that.

I merely suggested that she hadn't read the full thread, because it was pretty obvious from her comment that she hadn't understood it.

Of course, it is possible that she had read it but failed to understand it.

And of course, it's possible that she did both read understand it, but chose to pretend that she hadn't understood because that suited some other agenda.

Under the circumstances, assuming that she simply hadn't bothered to read it was probably the kindest option, don't you think?

There we go again. Passive aggression.

"Calling out racism makes people angry".

No.it doesn't.

Accusing people of being racist because they hold concerns over the current situation with mass numbers of channel crossing asylum seekers and all that is a by-product, is not racism.

Racist posts will obviously get deleted. Differences of opinions won't.