Fake threads

[HeadDeskHeadDesk]

Hi MNHQ

I am one of many posters who, in recent months, has noticed and often commented on the sheer volume of posts, usually in AIBU, that have had all the hallmarks of a fake thread designed to drive traffic.

They read like those long-winded 'dilemmas' posted on Bored Panda or 5 Minute Crafts or similar, that pop up on our facebook feeds. The issues are always along a similar theme, some sort of family problem or dilemma that is bound to divide opinion and lead to a fierce debate on a long running thread.

I can always spot them. They are posted in the morning, the OP usually has no other posts under that user name, or just one or two anodyne responses on other people's threads within the previous 48 hours to give the illusion of a regular poster. Even the user names chosen seem to follow a predictable theme. There is rarely, if ever any further engagement on the thread they've started, even though they have asked for advice and opinions for this 'problem' and got 10 pages of feedback. If there is any engagement it's brief and not as involved as you'd expect it to be. Again,I feel this only happens once people have voiced misgivings that the thread might not be real, as if to reassure us that the poster is genuine, but there is clearly no real interest in engaging in the thread they started.

Usually when people call out the OP on a thread for possibly trolling, lying or making up stories, MNHQ starts smacking wrists for troll hunting. Yet I've noticed when it happens on these 'baity' sort of threads, there is no reaction from MNHQ.

Mumsnet, I'd like to know the truth because I feel like we are being taken for fools just to keep your site turning over and your advertisers happy.

Do you, or do you not PAY for people or bots to create content in the form of fake threads? Either content creation services, or people who already work for MNHQ? Yes or no?

Or do you use AI to make them up and just post them yourselves?

maybe removing threads that OPs don't come back to might be worth considering.

Another possible solution is AI companies using human MNetters to train their bots to sound more human.

And sometimes they definitely look like a journalist harvesting opinions for some article or other.

This sounds ominously plausible.

I’m going to be looking out for these threads, although truth be told I’ve started some in the morning before work and often it takes a good half hour to get a thread moving so it may seem I’ve disappeared but in reality I’m just at work…

There was one the other day about a security light. It was clearly written by AI. Once you thought about the detail in it didn’t make sense. But it was funny and everyone was snorting their tea out of their noses and waking the baby and telling to op how funny she was. The op never came back to the thread. I reported it as did others but nothing happened.

As a pp said it’s often their first post or they do a couple first to make it seem real. The names are often adjective-noun-number.

Including those with the one or two lame responses of, ‘I am reading all of your replies, I promise’.

Ah yes. See: Aston University MN Data Scrape.

What happened to Justine/MN’s legal case?

I've read something about that. There's quite a bit of talk of it happening a lot on reddit.

There's definitely a political dimension to it, too. I'd bet most of the "benefits bashing" posts (and there are so, so many) are written by anti-Labour activists.

People have been making up nonsense on the internet to provoke a response since the dawn of time. Well, since the 1990s.

It's not new and the fact that more people are on forums than before, and they're not all that savvy, means the hunger to wind people up can be fed pretty easily on a huge site like MN with lots of engagement.

Plus the "no troll-hunting" rule (which I support) means the default position is to take posts at face value - or report privately.

There's no need to assume MN would do this (make up posts) when it's been incredibly common since even before MN existed.

My opinion is that lots of them are by people who were in a very minor "situation" irl who wondered what would have happened if x,y, or z had been the case to make the situation more extreme or dramatic... and they post about that exaggerated situation, so they're only half making it up.

The really fake ones are usually obvious!

there is certainly a crystal clear agenda right now re both people on benefits and disabled people. It's disturbing how little a push many people need to just dive right into the hate.

Yes people are always going to make stuff up, but now they don’t even have to make an effort. Just ask Chat GTP to make it up for them. They get reported but not often deleted and people get swept along with it.

Interesting question and I have to say I’ve noticed this too. I’ll usually leave the thread if the op isn’t engaging after about 15 or so messages.
There was another interesting thread this morning about MN use of Facebook and people responding on fb instead of on the MN site.
Changing times !

Absolutely - more people can make more "well-written" posts at a greater rate than before AI.

But I don't think this means MN are doing it themselves, which was the point I was trying to make (probably not very coherently! )

I don’t think they are doing it themselves but there have been threads that are blatantly Chat GTP posts that are never followed up by the op. HQ don’t delete them though.

Hi all,

Thanks for the posts. The question of MNHQ creating or commissioning certain threads comes up a lot, and even more so now it’s so easy to generate posts with AI, which naturally creates more suspicion. So it’s worth addressing clearly. We don’t create threads ourselves, we don’t pay anyone to do it, and we don’t use bots or AI to seed traffic. We’ve never done this and we are absolutely committed to maintaining Mumsnet as a space for human interaction.

As with any large anonymous forum, some posts won’t be genuine. That’s just the reality of the internet, but we’ve seen no evidence of any organised effort targeting Mumsnet. When trolling does happen, the motives tend to be far more mundane - attention-seeking, mischief, or trying to rile women on one of the few big sites that isn’t male-dominated.

We know some posters are frustrated when an OP doesn’t return or when a username looks random. Just to clarify: lots of posters choose not to come back to threads, and our system offers random usernames at sign-up, so that doesn’t indicate trolling either.

What often gets lost is the other side of this. We regularly hear from posters who come to Mumsnet during very difficult periods, only to be accused of trolling because their situation sounds unlikely or they haven’t replied quickly enough. Some have told us it put them off seeking help entirely. That’s why we don’t allow troll hunting. Our guidelines say we’d rather risk being taken in than wrongly accuse someone who genuinely needs support.

We are working on technical tools to make life harder for bad-faith posters and easier for everyone else. In the meantime, if you spot something that seems off, please report it and we’ll take a proper look.

Thanks again for raising it.

I did wonder about that but I thought I'd covered it comprehensively enough by adding 'or people who already work for MNHQ? Yes or no?
Or do you use AI to make them up and just post them yourselves?'

I agree it's important to word things in such a way that people cannot get off the hook on some technical loophole or evading the question because it wasn't specific enough.

Anyway, Justine says no, absolutely not, so.....

I'm flummoxed as to what anyone else would have to gain by doing such a thing and it does seem to be rage bait, or at least just posts deliberately designed to generate a lot of opinions and engagement. However, some of the subject matters are fairly mundane and usually involve financial or moral dilemmas involving work or school or family, rather than the overblown, outrageous, dramatic or tragic storylines your classic attention-seeking troll or fantasist would usually go for.

@JustineMumsnetThanks for the reply. 22 years a member here and can honestly say that it is far worse now than it has ever been. The posters not coming back at all or just giving one sentence answers for the rage bait is the most annoying thing of all. We all know the internet is a cesspit for all sorts of shenanigans but this is ruining the essence of what MN is all about. Such a shame to see it change so much for the worse.

I'm pretty dubious of the AI SEO type spam on various niche Mumsnet sections. That have no links, but are perfectly crafted for searches, such as designing a chicken coup. I commented on a one about it being AI and my post got fully removed within minutes, like it's not even there, not the usual "removed for violating mnhq rules" or whatever it normally says.

I saw that one! The lack of link threw me slightly. I had assumed someone 'else' would post 'oh yes and XYZ Chickencoops dot com fulfills all of those needs for me!'

Not very likely if it's a thread which attracts a lot of posts I'd have thought?

They all seem to have similes usernames of 3 random words put together. Once you see it you can’t unsee it

These are the default usernames referred to by Justine above - "our system offers random usernames at sign-up, so that doesn’t indicate trolling either."

Ahhhh well I suppose genuine posters generally choose their own usernames

I know what you mean and I totally agree. I often have to call out the obvious fakes but then I’m reported and comments deleted. I’m not sure whether I’m actually reported or whether mumsnet has its own system that flags up ‘troll hunters’.

it’s very off putting to see so many of these threads and there’s clearly a big incentive for them to be posted and reacted to.

i don’t think you’ll get any admissions here though