The MNHQ Moderation team

[BarrackerBarmer]

Dear MNHQ

I'm very grateful for the commitment to free speech you've publicly taken, and for Justine's courage this week.

A former disgruntled employee of MN is writing on Twitter about the 'transphobia' of MN staff, and calling you TERFs. She is showing a great deal of bias and intolerance towards women with feminist views, this may well be her honest opinion, which is no big deal I suppose, since she is no longer an employee.

At least, it isn't an issue until she calls a shout out to her
'friends who still work at MN' to report and take down posts by 'transphobic scum', by which she appears to be referring to any poster objecting to being called TERF by her friend.

Regardless of the personal views of the MNHQ staff, who should be as free to hold their own views as I am mine, I am disturbed that there may be a small contingent of employees who are invested in unfair moderation and will not be applying fair-handed principles, at least if the claims of this ex-employee are credible.

Can you please give posters some reassurance that the difficult job of fair-handed moderation isn't being abused by the 'friends' of ex-employees who are 'reporting it all' and taking down posts because any gender criticism means the poster is 'transphobic scum'?

Thank you.

How about you just don't say anything online you wouldn't say to a trans person's face in the first place?

As a person who could identify as queer but is offended by the term - what this woman is doing is not just disgusting and threatening to all women on here, but it is particularly threatening to the lesbian, bisexual and trans people here.

This person should never be employed again in a capacity that allows them access to anyone else's data.

Emma Healey says on Twitter "I've deleted some screenshots from this thread as I did not realise they had data in them, my point still stands - but this was an accident and not something deliberate at all."

How could this former employee not realise images "had data in them"? And more to the point, why has a former employee retained copies of these images?

If she's reading this thread then maybe it'd be helpful for her to know that the last person I dealt with who took confidential personal data from work had a high court injunction served against them and a costs order.

I hope she has deep pockets.

She has deleted the screenshots that contained IP addresses but I’m pretty sure that doesn’t matter one bit, legally.

I’m having a scroll through the CPS website right now.

Hmm... she is backpeddling furiously. I hope she knows that the data protection rules are set by the government and not Mumsnet... Claiming it to be an accidental data release is paper thin frankly and I am not sure would stand up at all based on the clear motovation...

Motivation...

If anyone wants to look up i formation re reporting data breaches, here you go: ico.org.uk/for-the-public/

Legally she is fucked, under the data protection act. Claims of Transphobia are NOT going to fly here. She'll end up in court over this, especially if the user whose IP address is visible in the screenshots contacts the authorities.

Reasonprevails - the women here constantly express a need and willingness to discuss these issues outside of Mumsnet as long as it is safe to do so.

It is not safe to do so.

Also, you do realise you can't dox someone with just an IP address, right?

This is quite worrying. Would like some assurances about MN’s data security policies.

To be fair...there are quite extreme views expressed in relation to the rights of trans people on here, and generally no action is taken by MN...so I can see their point, even if I am concerned with the information which MN is allowing to be disseminated potentially.

No but it is still personal data that shouldn't be splashed all over twitter and it CAN be used to find out approximately where someone lives.

'accidentally' publishing personal data is not a defence.

The fact that it happened is ultimately the problem, the intention behind it is irrelevant really.

And her reply calling transphobes 'scum' was in response to this thread, written about someone she knows: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3222263-Slide-show-on-How-to-Deal-with-TERFs

Is that part of the civilised debate? Picking on a student?

I think I'm going to speak to a solicitor. I don't like this one little bit. If need be, the PP who have screenshotted, would you mind if I used them? TIA.

I didn't realise there was an IP address in the screen shot and I've asked MNHQ to delete the images.

An IP address can be data in certain circumstances but not always, generally depending on what other information can be obtained about the user of the IP address. Email addresses can also be personal data. Under the new General Data Protection Regulation which will come into force in May, IP addresses will be personal data.

Reasonprevails - for what reason are you diminishing the fears of many women in order to defend an illegal and unethical act?

I always post within the law and within the realms of respect and dignity for others and their life choices. Thank you for the utterly pointless and patronising reminder Reason.

It was @StillTryingHard that she posted an ip address on twitter, MNHQ will have to get in touch with that poster.

From a database pov yech should be able to query what data she accessed, captured, downloaded, emailed.

Thank you for bringing this to Mnhq attention. I’ve also reported the thread. The more reports, the faster the response (I think).

Also, you do realise you can't dox someone with just an IP address, right?

You can have a fine old time hacking them, though.