Reducing Moderation Load for MN (continuation of Dealing with Inflammatory Posts)

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

I'm starting another thread - which is really a continuation of the previous post re dealing with inflammatory posts and comments. On Site Stuff, MNHQ have revealed more about their issues with FWR - i.e. the moderation workload. They need that reducing.

Please do also take on board the fact that the combative tone isn’t just in relation to goady posts or trolls - the majority of deletions take place in discussions where there isn’t a debate or conflict. It’s a root and branch problem.

What's the nature of the root and branch problem - is there a pattern to the deletions? Are they from certain OPs? Without fully understanding the problem, I am unsure what solutions to focus on - ie. will self policing the tone work as that assumes it's our comments that are the problem? Or is it, as I suspect, trolling that is increasing the mod workload?

I personally don't report much as I am conscious of their workload. Am I alone in this? Thus, I have asked them if they have analysed which accounts are doing the reporting (to see if Sealion and troll accounts are swamping them). Or is it the mods trawling through comments policing the tone??? Or is it us?

BTW @Datun has suggested pinning a post emphasising self policing. Great idea if it is us - but if so, what phrasing is OK and not? Would I be right in thinking saying "self id doesn't take sufficient account of concerns about women and children is fine"? But what is off limits? I still come back to what is that the root cause of the mod workload increase?

Secondly, I keep pointing out that Sealions/concern trolls use covert bullying so the pattern of someone's comments is important, not just a one off remark. As with coercive control in DV, each individual incident can seem inconsequential, but over time the drip, drip cumulative effect leaves women alternating between enraged and cowering. And with Sealions it's not just the comment reported but a pattern of covert bullying remarks consisting of dismissing others concerns, falsely accusing others(Transphobia), criticism that is based on distortion, misrepresentation or fabrication.

Where I think we may need to be smarter is in dealing with Sealions. I have heard it argued that the debate is needed. But if one is wasting one's time on Sealions, it just gives them more ammunition to report and complain about. It feeds them. Hence more mod workload. The only way I have found effective is not to engage with known Sealions. I just ignore them. I don't engage personally with them. So we potentially have a conflict between those who want to have the debate and yet at the same time needing to call time and IGNORE Sealions, after they have demonstrated an unwillingness to engage healthily. For example on the Inflammatory post - I would have preferred to call time on certain Sealions much earlier - there's no point in being nice if it defeats the object ie having debate with someone who wants to engage plus not increasing the mod workload.
Would love some of your thoughts…..

Moderating our own responses with #TGLWGH is fine,.but it isn't going to stop trolling, sock puppeting and sea lioning. It would seem that some of these TRAs have a lot of time on their hands for baiting and screenshotting.

I would suggest to @MNHQ that they need some more mods. Second tier perhaps, with a specific focus on these boards or this topic.

Because nothing short of disappearing will mollify the TRAs and we aren't going anywhere.

I was guilty of reporting several posts yesterday, which I should have ignored, and also of feeding a troll. I will be more careful in future. I don't usually bother with sealions because I don't have the patience, so I'm not guilty there

Maybe you should also just have a good think about what is inflammatory and goadiness. The more comfortable people have become with FWR having become a trans excluding space rather than one that is for feminists across the spectrum, the more posts have appeared which are pretty aggressive and mocking. Or link to sites that are.
And any dissent is shut down in the most patronising tone.

Can I just say that compared to the rest of the internet this board is polite and full of articulate, passionate women. Gosh that makes them mad doesn't it, and it's always us who have to change what we do. When I was in an abusive relationship it was always me, the way I spoke, what I wore, if I could only get that right.

We have to police ourselves so that this debate happens, and it has to happen because some bugger has to protect our sex based protections.

....but....but...I dream of a future when women are allowed to be Bloody Cross, at least as cross as men get without it being considered a hate crime.

We have to do what it takes though, state facts politely, but state them. we are only speaking the truth, women and girls do exist.

If sealions and the like were ignored then I for one might still be thinking 'where's the harm?....why can't we be nice?'

They allow an opportunity to repeat the arguments for the benefit of lurkers and for that reason (provided people stay calm or walk away if they can't) I think that they perform a very useful function. Lurkers aren't stupid - they can see who's on the wind-up.

A pinned post would be a good idea, I think - and a few concrete examples of what is/isn’t acceptable.

It’s difficult with the sealions. I tend to assume good faith and don’t always pick up on the troll cues. Maybe said pinned post could include a few definitions.

Do / could mn use volunteer mods ?

Do / can ( capability and in accordance with t and c ) mn analyse based on ip address as well as user Id to look for patterns ?

I think it's always best to assume good faith. I too have seen threads where posters were to all appearances asking perfectly reasonable questions and yet were greeted with sarcasm. I realise that other posters probably knew more about them than I did but it still didn't look good.

Give them enough rope and most of them show their true colours.

I haven't read the whole of the other thread, I'll give it a go later.

But one thing I find frustrating is that this is feminist chat, a place for women to talk about their experiences, opinions and feelings. Not everything needs to be debated. I think some don't appreciate that women just need to talk.

It's frustrating when we are talking and someone pops up to say 'I dont care who is in the loo next to me' when it's nothing to do with the thread, or someone takes over, talking about their irrelevant to the conversation experience. I don't know if this is deliberate de-railing or people not understanding.

I don't like Reddit, but their 'about this community' can be usefully to set rules and clarify position - it's easy then to refer people to the rules and move on, rather than having to get involved in a debate.

I think, general what we need to do it stop engaging with people who are derailing or trying to domination the thread. Women talking to women is just that, not an echo chamber. We don't have to justify ourselves.

And we also need to be aware that all sorts of people are lurking, some are trying to shut us down, so we need to avoid insults.

Am I allowed to say I think Paris Lees or is male if it's relevant to the discussion?

I reported a few posts the other day that contained insinuations about a specific person. There’s a risk if we discuss anyone that there may be posters (including regulars) overstepping the mark.

I know from other sites I frequent, that we are being watched and targetted. I don’t know (and presumably MN cannot afford to be specific) whether the fear is litigation, or whether the problem is targetting of sponsors, or indeed something else I haven’t even considered.

I too would like to see a sticky.

Perhaps it could also recommend we don’t make any allegations, speculations or insinuations regarding specific people unless they are already in the public domain and can be proven. Indeed (just thinking out loud here - feel free to tell me if this is way out of line) perhaps if mentioning a specific person, we should be able to prove our comments using screenshots. That would have prevented, for example, all the recent speculation over the YouTube shooter.

It’s difficult to know without understanding exactly where the problem lies, as others have said. Is it possible for you to open a private dialogue with someone like Datun, MN?

Also I’ve seen lots of crowdfunders about this topic make their totals in a surprisingly short space of time. Womanformally known asked in another thread whether Mumsnet staff had received training from DV specialists in covercive control. Might it be possible, if such training has not occurred, that those of us who use this board might be willing to contribute towards such training? Again, just thinking out loud about what might help.

Really don’t want to lose this space. Thanks Mumsnet for having allowed these discussions to occur.

I personally don't report much as I am conscious of their workload. Am I alone in this?

I'd never reported anything until this warning from MNHQ appeared. It goes against my free speech grain and I've got the hide of a rhinoceros so nothing rude said to me personally really bothers me.

Over the last week I've reported several posts for goadiness or personal abuse towards regular FWR members. But I just don't feel comfortable doing it so I think I will desist.

Aside from eschewing a highly hostile tone and not allowing ourselves to be trapped into ad hominems of our own, I don't see what else we can do. It seems fairly clear to me that an external campaign is being waged on MNHQ and FWR posters alike using the well worn DV tactics of coercive control. There's no way to satisfy it. Any and every capitulation will lead to further and more extreme demands.

As I see it, all I can do is keep my temper, be polite, and continue to make the points I want to make, even if those points are not appreciated outside the forum. Because otherwise, why am I here?

I agree with Damn

I think it's extraordinary what counts as deletable on here, in comparison to what counts as deletable on AIBU. There's no end of FFSaking, telling people to get a grip, goading, rudeness, derailing and swearing at people there

Feminist Chat is the best of MN and hand on the one it saddens me we have to tread so carefully, but if the greater good is to engage former lurkers and people who are new to the site and not alienating then so be it. Most posters on here can do it.
I don't think it necessarily means ignoring people who are not posting in good faith, unless it's impossible to do so without losing our tempers. I am definitely counting myself in this

I also want to say a big Thank You to the regulars on here. You have educated m no end

Just to clarify, I mean overstepping the mark accidentally without thinking about it. The discussions here are sometimes very frank and it can be hard to remember that every word is potentially being policed by those who would use anything they could to this discussion down.

I'm a bit concerned about the recent deletion of the thread that was taking the piss out of a graphic explaining gender, agender, etc. Is that where we are now? Gender is serious business and levity isn't allowed? A few of us were making jokes about the idea that women have AGP in another thread - is that now not allowed on the same grounds, pisstaking being unacceptable even if not aimed at specific people?

I feel like we're being herded in a particular direction without a whole lot of clarity in terms of what the direction is. Which may be a legal thing, who knows, but it's disconcerting, the lack of clarity.

I agree with Floisme. I've only been on these boards a few weeks and was naive when I arrived. Discussions with the 'sealions' were what opened my eyes to the issues for women and girls with the changes that are happening wrt who is considered trans and their legal status.

Nevertheless, I am worried about the board getting closed down and the space for these discussions being removed.

I also think that there is something in what WidowWadman says. I am inclined to engage in good faith, until posters prove to me that they are not reciprocating. Once I notice that, I reduce or stop engaging (e.g. with crispbutty) - although, I did learn a thing or two through engaging with them and I think it is always important to challenge the basic premise of your opinions. This is how we avoid becoming an echo chamber.

Others may already know that a poster has form for not engaging in good faith, or spot it sooner. I don't think it is necessarily helpful to point this out aggressively in that case. My inclination would be not to engage, or engage in a brief polite way, so as to alert other users that this discussion has potential to deteriorate into a slanging match. The TGLWGH approach suggested initially has that effect.

"I think it's extraordinary what counts as deletable on here, in comparison to what counts as deletable on AIBU. There's no end of FFSaking, telling people to get a grip, goading, rudeness, derailing and swearing at people there"

Quite. AIBU is fight club most of the time.

And don't get me started on the dog threads!

I agree with Floisme about it being useful to engage with people asking apparently disingenuous questions.

There was an "all dogs are disgusting!" versus "dogs should be allowed everywhere!" thread in AIBU recently. It was a bloodbath compared to this forum. OTOH, as far as I'm aware there isn't a highly organized group of dog lovers/haters trying to get AIBU shut down, so...

As I see it, all I can do is keep my temper, be polite, and continue to make the points I want to make, even if those points are not appreciated outside the forum. Because otherwise, why am I here?

YY to this

I wonder whether pronouns are an issue. The media, the police, the NHS, local government etc will address people by their personal pronoun of choice. So I am always a bit taken aback when I see (quite a number) of posters on here who make a choice not to do this.

I always notice it and it jars a bit - and I understand and am involved in these debates. For a new person to the board, I wonder whether they see it as just plain rude or offensive? I will always try to be respectful and if someone wants me to use a particular pronoun, frankly I am going to do it.

It is quite possible to write about someone without using she or he. It's the issues that we're debating that's most important, not using language that some will see as insulting.Pick our battles and all that.

I'm not comfortable using preferred pronouns. It is a battle I've picked. I think the insistence on it is a large part of the problem we're facing. I am happy to use no pronouns at all.

Sometimes people use 'trans' when I know they mean either 'some TRAs' or 'transgender ideology'... I think this is very important to consider!