The MN Mail Column - what we think, and what we plan to do next... part 2

[whataboutthisone]

Firstly, I am a regular but have created a new name for this.

My thoughts about what I know so far:

1. In a much earlier post there was a discussion about a change in T&Cs and whether they are valid or not. Several years ago I took a company to court for a breach of their T&Cs. Their argument was that they had changed T&Cs and my complaint was therefore no longer valid. However, the judge said that because I had not specifically been asked to accept the new T&Cs, I was entitled to rely on the ones I had accepted and therefore I won my case.

1. I choose to post on MN in the knowledge that the details I give are probably just obscure enough to anyone I may know in RL who also posts, so that what I say still effectively remains private. However, that doesn't mean that the same could be said of, for instance, my mother, who reads the DM (!) There is probably just enough about my circumstances that would enable her to put 2+2 together. I would like the option to choose whether or not I let my Mum ( or anyone else in RL) in on certain areas of my life, and there is a real possibility that this hack, has taken that choice away from me.

1. I have never ( and now will never) post asking for advice, but I will also be very careful about offering advice in the future. I, along with many others, occasionally use examples from my life to explain where I am coming from. If I continue to do that, as I said earlier, it is possible that some people would be able to work out who I am. Now, I am not so big-headed as to believe that any advice I offer is worth taking, however, there are many fantastic posters on here who do give amazing and insightful advice based on their own experiences. It would be a real shame if that was to stop because they, like me, do not want to share some of those experiences with the folk they are close to in RL. It would also be a real tragedy if others were prevented from asking for help for the same reasons.

I am very disappointed that any MNer would feel it is acceptable to violate the trust we place in each other on this forum. I do not know who she is. I do not want to know who she is. But I hope she is hanging her head in shame for breaching the trust that has been placed in her by everyone whose words she has stolen to make a few bucks!

I'm sorry if you think this is fanning the flames a bit but one thing is irking me. Wasn't the moldie site set up so that the members of it could post somewhere in private? Therefore if some of the contributers to these DM threads are moldie members, can I just ask why they don't just post in there? Surely that would be the safer option for you?

And if they went to those lengths to obtain that privacy, doesn't that say again about the obvious point being raised that mumsnet is a public forum?

I found this legal statement about copyright and public forums: "Copyright protects works of authorship. To receive copyright/protection, such works must be 'original' and 'fixed' in a tangible medium (of expression). Facts are not protected by copyright, regardless of the amount of time/effort/money spent discovering those facts. Copyright protects originality, not effort (sweat of the brow). Copyright owners have no course of action against anyone who independently creates a duplicate of a copyrighted work. Fair use means using a portion of a copyrighted work for purposes of news reporting, parody, research and/or education about such work. This may be done without permission of the author. One will have to credit the source i.e. name the author of the work."

I hope that clears up some of the confusion over what can be copied and what cannot.

Are you fishing for moldies here FC?

Well I've been on MN all day and I'm still gamefully employed.

I hope!

This is all code to me - i thought the moldies were a group that flounced off and came back. Didn't realise they started their own site within a site - how was that allowed?

Also no idea who Cod and Robinw are...although I can live without knowing to be honest.

I think it is a really cheap fucking shot by this journalist. Really, really cheap. And it will certainly affect how I post in future.

Lol, Nancy, not quite. There was a separate forum set up ages ago, which was a spin off from MN, things happened and people went back on it for privacy reasons mainly. The people who are part of that forum are known as 'Moldies'.

Is the Enid reference some sort of moldies joke?

Column was out each Wednesday wasn't it, so I guess we will know if it's still running just after midnight...

FC, some moldies still post on MN, so ofc they would post on here about their views/opinions and even those that don't could be affected as their posts still remain.

"By FruitCrumble on Tue 18-Aug-09 18:54:40
I'm sorry if you think this is fanning the flames a bit but one thing is irking me. Wasn't the moldie site set up so that the members of it could post somewhere in private? Therefore if some of the contributers to these DM threads are moldie members, can I just ask why they don't just post in there? Surely that would be the safer option for you?"

They do. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I am also pretty pissed off about the selective deletion thing as I asked ages ago for my posts to be deleted and MN refused. I had to compromise and have only some posts deleted. Unfair.

FC, how many times do you want the same thing said to you before you will actually take it in?

A large part of the problem here is posts already on the site - exisiting posts, posts that were written before now. Posts that are already written can have been written by anyone regardless of whether they later joined Moldies, DM forum or the flaming Dr Who appreciation site (or for that matter just changed name). Anyone who has posts here has the right to be concerned about their usage and more than that anyone who intends to post here in the future has the right to know how those posts will be used/handled/whatever.

I have noticed your flair for turning up whenever things seem to be getting a little quiet round here FC... I am wondering if you are enjoying the attention just as much as other more blatent attention seekers on these threads.

Can you explain the Enid joke VVQV?

Vee - thanks. all very confusing.
MP - Femail is on a thursday

Ah, you are right Nancy, although Google has the articles filed on a Wednesday, for some reason

I'm sorry kingcanute, I don't have the time or inclination to spend a large part of my day on mumsnet therefore I can only post when I get a spare 10mins.

I'm not sure either, that the posts being in the past would make that much difference. The article I just quoted from didn't mention any changes in the law due to time lapse. So presumably someone could search mumsnet for quotes for an article they were doing on baby led weaning for example, and paste quotes from the site that were two years old. That information is still in the public domain so I'm not sure why you think that past posts are exempt from being quoted.

Thank you for confirming vendivicki, I had assumed that those who left to join the other site would post their most sensitive information on there, safe in the knowledge that it could not be tracked down by the DM or any other journal.

It would be amusing if all the mumsnet journalists were in fact hanging out in this other site, as they must be fully aware of the risks of their posts ending up in a national.

They start loading Femail online at around 11pm but it's very bitty so it might not be until around 3am that it's all up there.

....then sit back and wait for the fireworks !

Huh - I am saying past posts are not exempt and that is why anyone, including those who may have left the site, have an interest in how this turns out

Or maybe it was regarding the fact that MP does in fact work for MNHQ.. wot with being the round-up Queen and all that?

OR maybe Enid wants to offer MP a job. House-sitting or summat.

Who knows, I'm just the messenger. Shrug

I'm guessing it's a moldie joke that is going above my head

hoho

Yes I get paid for 2.5 hours a week to the write the Roundup - does that invalidate my argument?

I'm sorry kingcanute, from the tone of your post I had assumed, wrongly it seems, that you thought past posts should be exempt?

But given the ease of access to the search facility, this is not the case. Also, if posters are happy to have recent posts in the public domain, then surely they must realise that past ones are still in the public domain and are still googleable?

Perhaps MNHQ should have been clearer, but hindsight is a wonderful thing.

The article went out, it's done, it's now past news. No doubt MNHQ are trying to get together something that will stop it from happening again, but I'm not sure how they can. You can copyright articles with ease, but forums are a different matter.

I have a feeling that those waiting gleefully for the online mag will be disappointed. Apart from the DM who will be hugely pleased with the number of hits on the site.

I imagine there are some people who have stopped using MN, moldies, facebook, MSN or any other form of cyber communication. They are just going about their lives with a low-level concern now that their past issues may be aired in a scaggy waiting room somewhere instead of on a site used by like-minded people. There is no good reason for MN to refuse to delete their posts.

Is enid still around? Or is she just being used as some sort of in-house joke?

Do I get the impression that there is a fair bit of 'them' versus 'us' thing going on?

Oh well, I should really leave my involvement with mumsnet at that. I have children that need to get to bed and work that needs to be done, albeit at probably lower rates that MP gets!

Goodnight.

It doesn't invaildate your argument no, but people would be excused for believing it may colour your view slightly. A lot of your posts have been very 'poor mnhq having to this work' well... if you have a business, you have to run it, and deal with complaints/concerns, no?

Fc, Enid deregistered from MN. So no she isn't around, but nor is she being used for an in-house joke, she asked me to pass something on to MP, and as I was already posting here, I did. That's all.