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.

Emma was an intern.

And she is being weirdly protected by the mods

I was surprised by MNHQ’s fairly relaxed approach to this. I assumed all engines were firing behind the scenes (I have been involved in a number of data breach incidents). I was discussing this with a barrister friend last night and she thought MNHQ would be thinking of applying for an Anton Piller order (a court order to seize evidence that might be destroyed) as well as going to the police. It makes more sense in the context of HQ not realizing sensitive personal data is at risk here.

It’s simply not enough to accept Emma’s word that she did not have any other data or did not pass it on to anyone else. This needs to be properly investigated.

Also, I suspect MNHQ needs to update its report to the ICO.

Oops pressed too soon.

Emma was an intern.

I'm not going start tarring the mods who I've seen for years handle some pretty "lively" threads with grace and humour with the same brush as a naive, politically motivated, ill informed activist.

There are questions to be answered yes, I but I'm happy to give MNHQ the time needed to look into this issue.

We don't know what's happening behind the scenes but I don't think for a minute that this isn't being taken seriously.

It asks for your name and other stuff too. Is it just expected that we will lie ?

I don't think Emma is being protected by anyone.

I can understand not wanting to completely destroy someone I used to work with, even though they fucked up in a very big way.

She's not being protected.

They've deleted info about her to been squeaky clean on this as it's now a police matter.

Sorry but I think some posts on this are getting out of hand.

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

Agreed - I'm on thread one arguing that there are at least three issues:

1. MN v TRA generally
2. This data breach in particular
3. Concerns about the security of MNers' data currently not published.
4. Wider concerns about MN staffing and administration esp re IT.

But EH only seems to see 2 in the context of 1, with no acknowledgment that they're separate, nor of the legitimate worries about 3. 4 is solidly on MNHQ though EH has highlighted it.

It’s puzzling Bumble. Although I’m sure you, like me, have seen the cavalier approach some organisations have had to data protection. It’s long been a neglected area in businesses because of the relative toothlessness of the ICO. The cost-benefit of expensive compliance wasn’t worth it. I saw some change in attitudes after Dido Harding got raked over the coals in the parliamentary committee. The penalties under the GDPR should create a culture change. You can tell a lot about a company’s attitudes to DP by looking at the level of the person to whom the most senior data protection compliance officer and data protection lawyer report.

Anyway - it is a massive violation to have a little shit given access to join up our entire posting histories on MN - but it is too late. Who knows how many namechange history/IP/email combos she screencapped and sent to her MRA mates in genderqueer clothing (and her MN mod mates continue to do while they still have access)?

But what is done is done.

I love MN and want it too continue and I'll take the fucking hit.

But I need reassurance that people fleeing DV are properly protected. There is no excuse for having little wannabe shits with personal agendas putting families at risk.

There needs to be privacy procedures put in place so that an account can only be accessed by senior, trusted mods with proper justification, and for members to be emailed if the admin team have looked at their account and why. Trust needs to be restored.

But meanwhile isn't it great how far we've all come with bringing gender critical stuff to the fore?

everyone.

I don't think she's being protected either Weebo.

MN should reassure people about how their data is used and kept and if people want to dereg that's up to them and I understand why.

We wanted an apology from the Tweeter, one was made. We wanted it reported to the IOC and Police and it's been done.

MN should review what happened and sort out their policies and they likely are doing that.

None other than an employee! No relation, friend of a friend, third cousin once removed. Nada. Niente. Nothing. Cross my heart and hope to die!

On a hill?

Actually I've just looked at FB and answered my own question from waaaay back (possibly on first thread). If you have a FB account and don't have your privacy settings set to friends only, anyone can search for you using only your email address.

@MNHQ Will you PLEASE delete the post I've now asked you twice to do via the report post button? It is MY post and I want it gone!

I don't believe they are covering for her, they are trying to look legally pukka re people sharing her details.
Think of how Maria was admonished this week for calling her attacker "he" when she was not the one on trial...

The moderators are likely to be separate from the admin team. It's a different role. They may not even be based in MNHQ, but work from home, given the 24/7 coverage required

I wonder if EH was getting grief from her TRA friends about being associated with Mumsnet for six months after Justine's stance this week? And this was her way of proving she was still one of them. Immature bravado.

The belligerent tone taken against a former employer is baffling though; if it had been posted at midnight, I would have assumed it was the wine talking.......

MNHQ Thank you for (finally) removing my post. I'm putting it here as I asked you publicly, it's fair that publicly I acknowledge you did as I asked.

They went to the police after Information Commissioner advised them too, not because they were 'pushed'.