So what's going on here? Rage bait style thread has been whitewashed to remove blatant racism...

[BoobsOnTheMoon]

...and when I queried it with MNHQ I got a very strange answer

This thread started off with an OP that made specific reference to a child with a "foreign sounding name". Several posters, including me, responded to that calling out the racism.

MNHQ, even though the OP hadn't been back to the thread, removed that sentence completely. The multiple replies calling out the racism then made no sense at all. The edit isn't like when a poster edits, because you can't still see the previous version. So effectively it's been whitewashed. Bang and the racism is gone. Nothing to see here.

I was pissed off about this because yesterday MNHQ had told me it wasn't in fact possible to edit a post of mine to clear up the meaning, despite it only being a fairly small error. So I emailed and asked them to clarify what the rules are about editing posts for people after the edit window closes.

I got a reply that didn't really make a lot of sense, telling me that in this case the OP was edited because it "was a significant content error". This is extremely odd wording for removing all trace of the outright racism in an OP, especially where the poster has never posted before and hasn't returned to the thread. The OP actually has a number of AI tells, and is very much edging towards obvious rage bait, and I'm not entirely convinced the poster is genuine. In fact, given the very odd reasoning from MNHQ and the goady style of the post, I'm starting to wonder if MNHQ know that its AI rage bait and are letting it stand anyway, and only edited it to make it less obvious.

So can anyone clear up why this post was edited in this way despite the OP vanishing? Why was it described to me as "a significant content error" when it was nothing of the sort? What's that wording about? Did the poster ask for the bit about the "foreign sounding name" to be removed and if so how come that was ok when other posters are told their posts can't be changed for them? Is the poster even real, or are MNHQ knowingly allowing/collaborating with AI rage bait bots to drive engagement? Something feels really off here tbh.

I wasn't on the thread in question, but it wouldn't surprise me if MN wanted to let the rage bait threads stand - they often do, and I presume that more clicks is good for their advertising revenue.

They should at least let the edited content of the posts remain visible, though, like it does when we edit our own.

If the first post is too racist to be allowed to stand, then the whole thread should be deleted and the poster should be banned imo.

The rage bait has worked on you. I wouldn't waste anymore time on a random shit stirrer on the internet.

I’m think the key point is that the OP think it looks like the first post is AI generated by Mumsnet - and I have to say I agree (and I am not prone to conspiracy theories!).

It seems VERY unusual for MN to edit a post on behalf of an OP rather than either let it stand or delete it entirely. Coupled with the very vague response to people questioning it.

I just read that thread and wondered what on earth was going on.

I started on that thread then realised what had happened and abandoned it. It does have the edit noted at the bottom if I remember correctly.

Maybe it’s a new strategy they are trialling that hasn’t been fully rolled out. Ultimately I don’t care that much. It’s their site, I don’t pay for it, I don’t make the rules so will move on if it stops meeting my needs.

The AI ragebait threads are definitely either endorsed by mumsnet, or just purposefully ignored, so as to drive up engagement.

I have wondered for a while how many threads are made up by Mumsnet staff to keep the site going. It does seem likely that the thread was AI generated by them, because surely if it was written by a real mumsnetter they would have removed it for being racist? They don't normally just edit racist / other offensive stuff out of other people's posts. It is very odd.

Exactly. And to then describe the reason for editing as a "significant content error" and make no mention of the racism is just...bizarre.

I’m convinced that post is ai generated by mumsnet.

I strongly agree and would like clarification. Why was the racist framing in the post removed? Why not the whole post? It’s clear from the initial responses that the OPs racism is material to the discussion.

It sounds to me like a newer member of MN staff has made the wrong call.

⬆️ This!
Ive just gone back on the thread to re-read it. I did comment on it as when I first read it, it had already been edited. However, the actual point of the thread wasn’t about ‘foreign’ children receiving a gift, but about ‘disadvantaged’ children asking for a fairly expensive gift. The OP wasn’t complaining about the recipient being ‘foreign’. They were complaining about children from deprived backgrounds asking for expensive gifts. In that respect, it was interesting to see how many replies actually agreed she wasn’t being unreasonable! Looking at the vote, currently almost 400 people think she has a point and is not unreasonable to complain.
Sounds to me like MNHQ have shown us that there are some particularly unpleasant people on this thread who think children in need shouldn’t be grabby.

@Dgll
The point is that there is a sense that this thread is not a random shit stirrer.

If it was the football one, the OP could be a shit stirrer or just judgemental and ignorant.

If MN is really deliberately permitting or encouraging ragebait on here - and I have to say it is suspicious at the very least - I am just appalled.

The amount of overt racism and selfishness on here lately has seriously begun to get me down. I jave been taking it as a kind of 'sample' of where our heads are at as a nation, and it's ugly. I am horrified to think MN might be deliberately contributing to that, and deliberately emboldening the worst instincts of Mumsnet users.

I don't know what share of the revenue comes from ads, but I wonder if all the advertisers are equally content with what they see?

Or option 3, created by mumsnet. Given their history of making up product recommendations and making up users quotes for them, it's hardly a surprise if they've started making up their own users and threads.

It’s a very basic ChatGPT rage post. Designed to get people to interact, in the hopes the papers pick it up and drive people to the site.

If MN is deliberately creating rage bait threads then that would be extraordinary given Justine's recent plea for people to be nicer to each other and to report horrible posts.

'Significant content error' is a very odd phrase though, if it just meant 'edited because the OP asked us to remove the offensive bit'.

Regardless of the content racist or not, plus that a lot of the replies now don't make sense as the bit about the kid having a foreign name was removed, I didn't think that MNHQ edited posts, have they done this before?

And what's a "was a significant content error"? If some some words broke the rules and were removed, that's one thing, but 'content error'. Odd.

Right, so why are MNHQ not only letting it stand but deliberately editing it to look less controversial, then justifying the edit with a very strange turn of phrase?

The cynic in me would say it’s come from MNHQ. Hits all the topical talking points, gets people here and frothing.

Indeed. But that's absolutely disgusting if true.

My mind is blown! It’s obvious that goady threads are often started that probably have never really happened, and the OP never returns. I always imagined it was some saddo having a laugh. It never occurred to be that it was MN doing it themselves! Makes sense though.

All major chat sites do it. I don’t believe this can be the first time you’ve heard of it??? Reddit does it all the time with AI “AITA” threads that are obviously fake

Could Admin explain'content ERROR' please? What exactly was the error and do MN staff ever start threads which they are able to edit?