Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

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

MNHQ

We've deleted the Madeleine McCann thread

244 replies

JustineMumsnet · 04/05/2009 22:34

Because had we deleted all the posts that were worthy of deletion contained within it we would have lost half a thread, and what remained would have made no sense.

We would like to remind folks that Mumsnet's central philosophy is to make parents' lives easier. The McCanns are parents, they haven't been found guilty of anything and they have lost a child. By all means discuss the issues around this tragic case but please don't attack them personally here.
Thanks,
MNHQ

OP posts:
Idranktheeasterspirits · 05/05/2009 11:01

Yes they did accuse her of giving herself cancer actually. And quite a few said they were glad she was dying.
Making a living from being in the public eye doesn't mean that it is right to make personal attacks.

One poster said that she brought it on herself because she "must have had black sludge" pouring from her for months whilst another said it was obvious that she would get cancer as she was probably promiscuous.

My point, is that personal attacks are not supposed to be allowed on this website but there are lots that are left on here even if posters complain.

There were (by all accounts although i have not read the thread) personal attacks on the Mcann thread and it was rightly deleted.
There were personal attacks on the Jade threads and they were not deleted.
I would like Mumsnet to explain why.

Hulababy · 05/05/2009 11:39

daftpunk - why is it interesting that more people read the thread than posted on it? I would assume that that is actually the case with most threads on MN. There are, IME, far more people wh will lurk on a thread than actually post on it - epescially if it turns somewhat unpleasant. Definitely not unusual that.

mamadiva · 05/05/2009 11:46

Oh okay I revel in these threads... clearly...

I am not getting into rediculous little arguments with people who quite frankly back up their own lies.

So have a good day...

AitchTwoOh · 05/05/2009 11:46

what rot, idrank. i remember that 'black sludge' comment. jade goody made it.

daftpunk · 05/05/2009 11:52

Hulababy;..that makes them slightly voyeuristic dosn't it...and possibly hypocritical...

mamadiva · 05/05/2009 11:53

DaftPunk back away from the thread....

pagwatch · 05/05/2009 11:55

I whizz through active convos. I look at a few threads that seem relevent/funny/interesting or just grab my notice.
I read them.
sometimes i comment . Sometimes I don't.

And that makes me voyeuristic how?
A hypocrit how?

Is there some rule whereby if you read a thread you have to comment even if you have nothing you wish to say.

what bollocks

Ledodgy · 05/05/2009 11:58

No not voyeuristic DP. I read the thread thought this is vile and decided not to post mainly because I didn't want to bump the thread further. How does that make me a hypocrite?

Niftyblue · 05/05/2009 11:59

I read it
Didnt like it Didnt want to be a part of it as simple as that

Glad its gone

Hulababy · 05/05/2009 12:16

daftpunk - not necessarily no. Lots and lots of people read threads and then don't post for whatever reason. They may have nothing more to add, feel annoyed about what ha been said and don't feel they want to contribute, may fel unsure of posting their feelings, may hope that not posting will halt a thread, or may just b interested to see what is being said and by whom.

It is very much the norm on MN for there to be far more people who will read a thread rather than actually post.

onagar · 05/05/2009 12:21

Don't delete THIS thread. It now contains for our amusement a list of those who think that threads they disagree with should be deleted.

I skimmed the other and saw much I disageed with and some that I didn't. I felt no urge to force them to agree with me. It must be the way I was brought up.

MadHairDay · 05/05/2009 12:23

The right decision MNHQ. I dipped into it and was sickened actually. Thanks.

Upwind · 05/05/2009 12:26

Onagar - go you think libel should be decriminalised then?

FelineFine · 05/05/2009 12:29

15 days old....awwww

StealthPolarPig · 05/05/2009 12:29

I thought it was a wise decision to delete the thread as it probably had become a full time job to delete all the libellous posts

mamadiva · 05/05/2009 12:31

It does explain at the start of this thread that they deleted because they had to delete half the thread and the rest did'nt make any sense. LOL

Niftyblue · 05/05/2009 12:32

feline

StayFrosty · 05/05/2009 12:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

izyboy · 05/05/2009 12:56

As Hecate said, the Mccanns should be considered innocent until they are proven guilty in a court of law. Currently there is not even enough credible evidence to bring a court case against them. Therefore any discussion about the abdustion really is based on speculation alot of which (esp.on 'that' thread) could be libelous.

I was quite prepared to continue repeating 'they are innocent until proven guilty' until the thread finished. Real life intervened and I had to go out, then the thread was pulled. Good job really as I would have bored the pants off everyone and it was a shit 'discussion' anyway.

daftpunk · 05/05/2009 13:08

mamadiva; yes you are prob right, i only came on here to defend my decision to take part in "that thread".....but i fear that 3 or 4 of us will be forever branded "evil" by some rather misguided individuals.

if certain posters can't handle a debate that get's a bit heated they really shouldn't be on mumsnet...go and find a high school musical website or something, that thread was in the "news" topic about a case that is still very much in the "news"...and as for the criticism that we broke of to talk about music...so what?? do you think the oprah winfrey show doesn't have adverts?

some of you are unreal.

re; voyeurism;..i was talking about the MM thread...not threads in general.

chatta · 05/05/2009 13:09

it

amidaiwish · 05/05/2009 13:09

well done MNHQ
i read it all, it was vile.

chatta · 05/05/2009 13:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

JulesJules · 05/05/2009 13:21

Good decision to delete the thread. I read a few pages and was appalled by the salacious viciousness of a few posters.

Lulumama · 05/05/2009 13:22

i read the entire thread

you cannot have a debate, discussion or any sort of reasonable conversation when there is such massive polarisation

and it is not worth MNHQ having another legal action on their doorstep , just so some posters, in the minority, can post vitriolic spite dressed up as an 'alternative view point; that somehow should have been given more credence than the lines 'fed' out by the media, and that anyone who believed it was somehow deluded

of course you can pick apart every nuance, every snapshot, every conversation , every statement that the family made, and in retrospect, some things may not sit well with some people BUT I imagine at the time, they were not thinking of how they were going to be perceived 2 years down the line, they created as much fuss and media attention as possible to try to get their daughter back

if they had not tried everything, they would have been castigated, for surely as wealthy middle class doctors, they would have had the money and savvy to create a media storm.. damned if you do, damned if you don't

I hope that they receive some closure soon

Swipe left for the next trending thread