Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Censorship - Why are the Steiner threads being deleted and everyone being banned?

108 replies

barking · 07/07/2008 20:09

Can someone please explain to me what is going on?

I have asked MNHQ the following questions but have had no response

I had read on another thread that the reason was due to posters not contributing to other threads - can someone explain as I see plenty of examples of parents using only one topic and there isn't an issue with removing them.

Why was there no warnings given?

There have been other posters banned before for saying much worse and later reinstated

If someone is threatening mumsnet, can you please tell us what exactly for?

Is there such a thing as liability insurance we can agree to take out?

OP posts:
northernrefugee39 · 08/07/2008 08:09

No they haven't- most are still there, my search was wrong.
I've asked to have the post removed.

My feeling is that the threads were winding down anyway.

Where they got out of hand was when bee came in, and deliberately obfiscated the situation, and old hand on chat boards, and at promoting self serving links to sites.

There have been many people who found the information at the beginning to be useful and comforting- ie, that their story wasn't the only one, and that although the schools and anthros go to lengths to imply these are isolated incidents, they aren't.

There are still people recently who have shared horrendous stories, this thread for instance where I think it was that the poster said a friend had been paid £8000 or something by the school to keep quiet about a teacher's bullying.

JustineMumsnet · 08/07/2008 08:52

Hello folks,
So here's the situation. As the law stands Mumsnet is viewed as the publisher of what you write. Right now there is nothing we can do to transfer the liability even if you would like to carry that liability as individuals. This is something we've written on and are campaigning against - (The Tories seem quite interested in doing something about it which is good.)

For a while now there has been a vociferous debate between 2 groups - pro-and anti-steiner - on Mumsnet, which as many have pointed out has often been a circular one. Consequently we took a decision after trawling through the reported posts in our inbox on an almost daily basis to ban those whose only purpose on Mumsnet seemed to be to conduct a pro-or-anti steiner crusade i.e. they didn't contribute to any other threads and they regularly posted with fairly dogmatic/extreme views on the issue.
We still find our inbox filled with reported posts and have received a fair few threats of legal action too. Here's the sort of mail we are getting:

"If I see her posting promotion of libel at Mumsnet once more, I won't
tell you about it, but ask Percy Bratt of Bratt and Feinsilber in Sweden
to contact you in cooperation with the legal representatives of The
Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in the UK and Ireland
(www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html), about your negligent
way of allowing libel to be published at Mumsnet and the one who is the
most fervent publisher of it to continue to publish at Mumsnet."

Some of the pro-Steiner group on the other hand have suggested that they will sue us for removing material and started a Yahoo group suggesting that our over-reaction is as a result of my PMT - do men still think this stuff?

So you can see it's all very wearing. We have no wish to engage in correspondence with Percy Bratt. Experience tells us that even if you think you're on the side of common sense it can still cost you a lot of time and money!

What's more, as we've said a few times we have no idea of the writes and wrongs of the argument. And though we are reluctant and saddened to stop folks having a voice on any issue, as the law stands we - Mumsnet - are legally liable for what is said on Mumsnet. So the upshot is we cannot allow posts that are reported as being defamatory to stand. Even if they might be true - which is of course a defence - but one that we can not be sure of.

We've suggested to the anti-Steiner group that they start their own forum. They are clearly very certain of the validity of their position and therefore presumably would be happy to fight any ensuing legal battles - in fact in their position I'd imagine they'd been jumping over themselves to have a high-profile court case if what they say is true, is indeed true.

Similarly we've suggested that the pro-Steiner lot follow up their complaints with the individuals involved rather than Mumsnet but again they seem reluctant.

So all in all allowing this discussion to take place on Mumsnet is/has taken up an inordinate amount of time and is without question ill-advised from a legal perspective.

So I'm afraid I think the time has indeed come to "shut it down". Our previous legal encounter seemed a cause worth risking the Towers for but given that we don't even know the rights and wrongs of this debate and that most Mumsnetters are not engaged in it, we think this is a fight to take elsewhere.

Best,

Mumsnet Towers

FluffyMummy123 · 08/07/2008 08:54

Message withdrawn

lulumama · 08/07/2008 08:54

bloody hell, justine, that is serious i think you have made absolutely the right decision, not that you need my validation but it is clearly not a knee jerk reaction to a tricky debate. hope there are no further legal ramifications

theinsider · 08/07/2008 08:56

"most Mumsnetters are not engaged in it, we think this is a fight to take elsewhere."

Agreed.

FluffyMummy123 · 08/07/2008 08:57

Message withdrawn

SheherazadetheGoat · 08/07/2008 08:58

can we still discuss waldorf and statler institutions, i think it is important to air my opinions on raising children with dusty grumpy old men and their values.

FluffyMummy123 · 08/07/2008 08:59

Message withdrawn

lulumama · 08/07/2008 09:00

think they look bored of it all too

fryalot · 08/07/2008 09:02
lulumama · 08/07/2008 09:06
littlelapin · 08/07/2008 09:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

littlelapin · 08/07/2008 09:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

fryalot · 08/07/2008 09:09

leave it LL, leave it, don't ruin the moment

theSuburbanDryad · 08/07/2008 09:09

Justine - couldn't agree more. Have been lurking about on the Steiner threads as the issue seems close to another one I am working on at the moment (totally non-MN related) and their swiftness to litigate seems strangely familiar

(Had to at your "writes and wrongs" though - was that a deliberate typo? )

wannaBe · 08/07/2008 09:10

amen.

"in fact in their position I'd imagine they'd been jumping over themselves to have a high-profile
court case if what they say is true, is indeed true.".

Well quite. Shutting down some threads on one website could hardly be perceived as being stifling a debate? Especially if these claims are true (and I have no idea whether they are or aren't and am really not interested enough to find out) you would think that those claiming to have had such bad experiences would be only too happy to take up a legal position on the matter. If not, why not?

theSuburbanDryad · 08/07/2008 09:11

Oh, x-posted with all the other pedants LL and Squonky.

fryalot · 08/07/2008 09:11

hey, suburban I have to say that I have wondered about your issue as well when lurking on steiner threads... tres similar, no?

JustineMumsnet · 08/07/2008 09:13

You know we like to throw in an appalling typo/grammatical/spelling error in every post. We run a sweepstake on how long it'll take you to spot it...

SheherazadetheGoat · 08/07/2008 09:15

nice one justine - you must protect your infallableness at every turn.

Kewcumber · 08/07/2008 09:15

'or is called "Susan"' Oi rabbit - less of the Susanism please

Kewcumber · 08/07/2008 09:15

I spotted it wihtin 15 seconds but was too polite to note it. Do I get extra points?

fryalot · 08/07/2008 09:18

I should get the prize for being the pedantest pedant quickest I think

BagelBird · 08/07/2008 09:18

I agree - as someone interested in Steiner I was pleased to find those threads. However, they quickly became difficult and confusing to read. They left me more confused and frustrated than if I had just googled "Steiner" with "concerns"..They were so heavy going and difficult to follow that they seemed impenetrable to anyone not already busily posting and posting and posting and..

Not sure what to make about the bans if they have occured. Sounds rather "unmumsnetty" to me just to remove threads without stating why etc. But then mumsnet learnt the hard way in the recent past so not about to criticise. I truly hope that mumsnet did not pull the plug on them because of bullying from the pro-Steiner camp? Like to think that mumsnet HQ is wiser and more sensible bunch than to run scared! However, if they pulled them as they no longer were in the mumsnet spirit of being inclusive, informative and open discussion, then fair play.

theSuburbanDryad · 08/07/2008 09:18

Squonk - yes indeedy. Think it is just coincidence though. Will happily discuss it endlessly on MSN with you though if you don't die of boredom first.

Swipe left for the next trending thread