The MNHQ Moderation Team: Thread 2

[BarrackerBarmer]

Follow on thread regarding the data breach situation:
___

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.

I'm a bit confused about what's 'sensitive personal info' and what isn't? I'm a new user so only registered a few days ago and I was asked to indicate if I was pregnant (to get a child development calendar)

Emma Healeys twitter doesnt exist now.

unless I was blocked because I wanted to follow?

Tanith

From Justine on the first thread:

Hi everyone. Emma was an intern in the press office for 6 months until March and for a good portion of that time she did have access to the information in our user accounts pages. This is because part of her role involved occasionally contacting Mumsnetters to pass on media requests etc.

I was asked to indicate if I was pregnant

SPD if it's linkable to your name or otherwise identifiable. "There's a pregnant woman": not SPD. "There a pregnant woman in this postcode": very probably SPD. "There's a pregnant woman with this birthdate and this postcode": almost certainly SPD. "There's a pregnant woman with this birthdate and this postcode and the emailaddress [email protected]": SPD which runs around in a sparkly outfit with "SPD" picked out in sequins.

Spontaneous Did you report your post? If no, try that. If yes, report again and make it crystal that your DC is at risk because of this mess.

The thing is, you can't trust the mods now can you? Who is to say her mates aren't busy stealing all they can at the moment?

MangoesAndMatchsticks Yes, I did report. My DC is not in any danger due to the post, I just don't want my personal story attached to this name where I post about being GC. I will report again, thanks.

We absolutely can’t trust the moderation team as a whole now, no.

I’d like to also apologise to any users who have felt hurt, attacked, or vulnerable due to my actions. I recognise that we do not agree on this issue, but I know the impact that my actions may have had on them and their mental health.

The trouble is that some of the users who have felt hurt, attacked or vulnerable agree with EH on "this issue" assuming she means trans rights. She didn't just threaten users of FWR, or GC users, or transcritical users: she effectively (if inadvertently) threatened every registered member of Mumsnet.

It's a bit like throwing stink bombs into a school hall because you don't get on with a group of girls in Year Nine... and then apologising to those girls in Year Nine and nobody else.

We absolutely can’t trust the moderation team as a whole now, no.

I don’t see that it’s safe to conclude otherwise, sadly.

From EH apology it's clear she has no idea what's she's done....or perhaps she does and she doesn't care. She has let every mumsnetter down.

I really wouldn't want to minimise any of this. I think MNHQ's response has been dismal. (The old Sparks song keeps going round in my head: "Amateur Hour goes on and on ...")

But while I think it's fair to say that we can have reasonable doubts about whether we can trust all the mods team, I think it's unfair to state categorically that we absolutely can't trust them. We don't know that.

I also think that the TRAs must be jumping up & down in utter glee right now.

Baracker I did see that, but understood it was the earlier part of her contract and that access had been removed by the time she took those screenshots.

There’s no guarantee of this and, of course, it could be even more serious than seen so far.

However, I wonder if all that stuff she posted about her access was bravado to impress. Apart from those IP addresses, all she seems to have are some publicly available posts that her friends are desperately trying to twist... because they haven’t anything better to use?

The trouble is that some of the users who have felt hurt, attacked or vulnerable agree with EH on "this issue" assuming she means trans rights.

Indeed but she could just has easily have been an activist for an anti/pro abortion group, anti/pro zionist groups, anti/pro climate denial or any one of many others.

Its important to look at it not simply as a trans viewpoint issue but as a data issue used to close down debate.

I also think that the TRAs must be jumping up & down in utter glee right now.
Mumsnet took a stand against some TRAs who were pressurising advertisers.
In the interview with JHB, Justine stated this was in order to allow free discussion of legislation which may affect women.
There are a number of ways that some TRAs are attempting to close down discussions by women... isn't this one of them?

I think that's the most likely scenario, Tanith.

She's just a mouthy chancer who has nothing but a few screenshots and some personal opinions about HQ staff.

MrsUnderwood
Yes that is a worry, has it just happened once?
Please let me know what device/browser you are using, I will try and see if I get the same issue - and if you do see it again a screenshot would be really helpful.
Thanks

For me alone, I have (under more than one name)...

In this Act “sensitive personal data” means personal data consisting of information as to—
(a)the racial or ethnic origin of the data subject, I have posted about the ethnicities of my family
(b)his political opinions, i have posted political party membership
(c)his religious beliefs or other beliefs of a similar nature, i have posted about my beliefs
(d)whether he is a member of a trade union (within the meaning of the M1Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992),
(e)his physical or mental health or condition, i have posted in detail about my physical and mental health - in great, great detail when it comes to gynae health
(f)his sexual life, i have posted in detail about sexual things
(g)the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or
(h)any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings.

I trust MN mods. Emma is a bad apple.

@Pratchet

I agree.

Emma was an intern.