New guidelines in plain straightforward English

[spontaneousgiventime]

@MNHQ There is so much confusion over the new guidelines. They have been described as a minefield with no explanation of where the mines are. This ties in with how I feel.

Can we have the new guidelines in unambiguous, plain, straightforward English please?

Yes please! As discussed on another thread as an autistic woman I am beyond confused and feeling pretty threatened by this.

SpartacusAutisticus Thats a reasonable request and would help many of us.

I can summarise.

Don't hurt men's feelings, especially men who are very sensitive, report a lot and threaten legal action.

As long as you stick to that, you can talk about prams and knitting as much as you like.

Aaw hun what about moggeling tho?

I've got two strikes under these new guidelines. One (the first one) I accept, not happily as it breaks my right to free speech but was against the guidelines. The second I am still fucking raging about. It was for a non banned acronym and possibly partly due to a forum quirk.

No consistency at all and it's not fair.

A heightened sense of fairness is a) very relevant to autistic women and b) very relevant to women who are fighting for women's rights, so that does seem extremely rotten for you and for other posters with similar issues and concerns.

I think a lot of us are coming round to the idea that posts that are outside the guidelines, offensive to some, or goady, should be left to stand so that all readers can see exactly what is happening and draw their own conclusions on the quality of the arguments. (Unless the poster has asked for them to be removed or they are outing, or there is some offence against public decency)

A note should be made on the post by the mumsnet moderator that it breaches the guidelines and the reason why with a request not to repeat the behaviour. Or, if the software does not allow for this the post can be quoted by the moderator.

Delete being the only option is not really working anymore.

Then we could all see and learn exactly where the lines are drawn and that the rules are being applied fairly. I think others have suggested this elsewhere. It works well on another forum I inhabit where things can also get very heated.

The 3 strikes rule can then be clearly seen to be applied openly and fairly and for what reasons.

At the moment it is the opaqueness and apparent inconsistency of it all that is causing so much anger with posters wondering if they are being targeted and who by.

Please @MNHQ have some consideration for domestic violence survivors. Women are being triggered by the similarities between the new moderation policy and previous experiences of living under constant threat, never knowing which misstep will unleash the dreaded consequences.
Give us clear guidelines, and some way to contest strikes that seem arbitrary and unfair.

I think it's fair to say many women here feel like the sword of Damocles is hanging over us every post.

MNHQ have been on the Fudge.

Fudging seems to be the new 2018 trend in the UK.

Someone said (paraphrasing)

"we have all peak trans'd I'm close to peak MN".

It's sad many of us are feeling like that.

Mumsnet have only ever moderated on a report system. In general, if something is reported it's deleted simply because pretty much anything can be offensive to someone. So it's understandable that if outsiders come along and report everything a fair selection will be removed.

If you go into any long AIBU thread on here you will come across dozens of "breaking the guidelines" posts, but they stay because they aren't reported.

It's not the posting that is the issue here. Or the deletion. It's the fact that people can come from outside, not bother to join in with any discussion, but use the report = delete feature to shut down the people who do want to talk.

Restricted reportign rights for those who don't want to post would help. And restricted reporting rights for previously banned posters.. And a restriction on how many reports one poster can make. That way the "worst" things can be reported and deleted and the rest of us can get on with the discussion.

Women are being triggered by the similarities between the new moderation policy and previous experiences of living under constant threat, never knowing which misstep will unleash the dreaded consequences

This!!

I was trying to think the other day just why the trans debate has got to me so much. I read about the issue MN daily and find it highly distressing.

And it struck me - I got out of an abusive relationship a few years ago now. And the thing that I was left with was a lot of anger at myself that it took me as long as it did to get out. Over and over there were reasons to leave and I was under threat and for a complex variety of reasons I delayed getting out. I betrayed myself, at a basic level.

And I think with the trans issue, I see some of the same abusive tactics being used by a subset of activists as my partner employed (note I don't believe this is all trans people, just to clarify). And I sit here thinking like hell am I going to take it a second time. Because abusers follow a script and once you see it you can't unsee it.

So being further policed and asked to consider the feelings of a group of people who some of the time, in some situations are doing a lot of harm makes me very uncomfortable, to put it mildly.

I would bet a lot of women posting are in the same boat.

gendercritter - Yes! In my case an abusive institution. But it is all so familiar and very upsetting.

From HopeMN

Right now, we're reading the thread, we're taking on board the questions and points being made and will shortly update the MN trans policy to best reflect how we plan to balance everyone's needs. We hope the wait doesn't cause anyone any anxiety, truth is we're all bedding in these newer guidelines at the moment. We do our best to be an understanding bunch, and we hope you do too.

The above message is on This thread

It needs to be laid out in one place, with a sticky and with no comments to be added to that thread. I can’t keep up with 1000 comments threads in multiples about what we can and cannot say.

MNHQ need to lay out explicit rules, they need to place it in one place and pin it there and leave it for as long as they stick by it. If they update their policy they either do it it on a new stickied thread or on the same thread. They need to prevent confusion which is by its very definition exclusionary.

That’s not to say I don’t think there should be discussion, however the comments from MNHQ discussing policy on theads in places like site stuff, the disability threads go missed and unread by the majority of posters.

If the guidelines are to be amended than it seems logical to me, disabled posters and GC posters would be able to add an invaluable resource and mean once the new guidelines are in place we won't face yet more amendments in the future. Women like Datun and Langcleg could put over our view in a clear, calm concise way and some disabled posters do the same.

I am confused enough as it is and I'm not the only one. Yet here we are facing more amendments because the first ones were not thought out properly in the first place.

I so agree about "eligibility to report"..... given that specific people are being targeted it feels crucial that there is a fair approach to who can report, and that they are genuinely part of the Mumsnet community

Women are being triggered by the similarities between the new moderation policy and previous experiences of living under constant threat, never knowing which misstep will unleash the dreaded consequences

I'm not a survivor myself so I am not being triggered any further than being made to control my short but hot temper and/or using circumlocutive language to avoid crossing personal red lines, but this seems blindingly obvious to me. I find it very concerning that a website for women would put stress on its members in this way. A better way surely exists and should be found.

Adding my voice. I have autism and would appreciate clear guidelines.

EXACTLY THAT Circle.

I am a prolific poster and I'm totally lost. The rules need to be useable for users - from regulars to ploppers.

The fact that it is regulars who are MOST affected, is just wrong and shows up whats going on imho. And yes MN need to pulled up on it. Repeatedly and constantly. And unrelentingly and unapologetically. If the entire point of the forum is lost, why have it? Feminism was always about giving voice to those who didn't have voice and whose rights and vulnerability was ignored.

I personally, am at the point of being very cynical about it. It feels like a deliberate to get rid of 'troublesome' posters without banning them and creating an I'm Spartacus Effect in utter disgust in the process. It feels like a cowards way out. Gross Fudging.

I have to say that MN have lost a huge about of trust and respect over this, from a lot of quarters.

Its not rocket science to tell people what the rules are and to make them clear. The lack of clarity and the bullshit 'just keep to the rules' when everyone is going 'but we don't know or understand what the rules are' is contemptable. Its not something that was difficult to foresee being a problem. The mentality should always be: how do we ensure our regulars are happy, our occasional users are happy and our potential new users are happy and that each and every group know how the forum works.

I am ANGRY. They should know better. Their business model is about communicating a message (in order to maximise users and therefore advertising revenue), yet here we are.

Can I just say a bit about the word 'penis'?
Is it true that we're not supposed to say it?
I know that people who oppose the GC view (not sure what we can call them now) don't like us referring to genitalia.
However it is CRUCIAL that we are allowed to say who has one and who hasn't.
They are what is used to rape us. It is important to be able to distinguish between people with that capability and others.

However it is CRUCIAL that we are allowed to say who has one and who hasn't

Absolutely!