What is with all the thread zapping?

[LaSquirrel]

I can understand that this one ("DH and Jess Bradley") was iffy, and based on unsubstantiated hearsay.

But this one ("have you ever doubted your views" had been going for quite some time, was almost at 800 comments, and then zapped. When I asked around about it (I was just about to settle in and read it finally) women did not think it was 'troll hunting'.

Basically, it does not seem right to let it go to 800 then kill it. Particularly because it throws out all the work that women have put into it - a kind of devaluing women's work issue. If there was an issue with troll hunting, why didn't the mods jump in and put a stop to it? Why let it run so long (and it went for a week or so I think) then kill it?

What say you @MNHQ?

And then we just get a zillion and one people coming on to "ask a question" about why people think TWAW and what they are actually doing is fawning at the groupthink.

I don't see those like that at all - they've been more often attempts to get GC posters to say something Tweetable.

Rufus, I'm not shy about a bit of argument, and I am quite, quite happy to dissect Dr Christian's horrendous public views. But gossip about what he likes in the bedroom is not going to help that effort, nor is it especially relevant to Feminist chat to know what a gay man likes to do.

Rufus there was an entire article which linked to dr C’s bedroom antics and I detailed one of those antics. Not sure why MNHQ didn’t just delete my post tbh.

But I suspect they didn’t like the entire tone of the drugs chat, despite it being publicly available

Like i said floral

I didnt read it

And also as I acknowledged...because i didnt read it could well have been (and obviously was reading your comment) beyond the pale

Thank you shirley

I’m very unhappy that the doubt thread was deleted, and agree with other posters decrying deletion as a response. Blocking further comment would be a much better solution, imo. Perhaps MNHQ could offer a warning shot in comments before a thread risks deletion, if things really are getting too tetchy? I didn’t think they were on doubt, though. Still don’t really know what is meant by troll hunting, either. Seems reasonable to me.

In general I think entire threads being zapped should be avoided - regardless of your perspective on the issues surely it's better for everyone to be able to see what everyone else is saying.

This is my view too, AAK. Particularly on those long threads, where there has been a body of quality discussion. It smacks of laziness not to deal with it either as it is going on (pull up the thread direction), or to go through and delete within context. Maybe HQ are finding their new 'strike' policy a bit high maintenance, and figure thread blitzing is the way to deal with it. However, that kind of policy just gets regular posters annoyed "what's the point?" - so HQ are effectively trying to kill the forum, at least that is how it reads to me.

The direction I am coming at this from, is one of devaluing women's work. And it is work, to unpick some (rather strange) political positions. The forum may be labelled 'chat', but most threads are more than that.

I didn't read the Dr Christian thread - the man has already made me queasy enough so I tend to avoid him where possible. But now I want to know what was said cos I'm nosy!

Bore if you have a problem with me, or a comment, here is what you can do:

1. Tag me back into the thread (but I don't always check my emails)
2. PM me about it
3. Report the comment
4. Any combination of the above.

What you cannot do, is stalk me into a completely unrelated thread and have a go at me.

I don't see those like that at all - they've been more often attempts to get GC posters to say something Tweetable.

I see a lot of suspicion of that but not a lot of evidence. Still I'm not on Twitter so...

I had not realised that the ManFriday 'homophobia' (accusation) thread had also been deleted. But I just checked for the grounds by which it had been deleted.

Message from MNHQ: We're not 100% sure what's precipitated this but we think this probably isn't the place for it, so we've deleted it.

I took it as the OP baiting us (or smearing us/MF) by taking a satire tweet out of context. I figured we are 'big girls' now, and could handle it?

SarahCarer, it's quite true. Screenshots, usually without context, appear often on Twitter and various blog articles.

So what we have now is at least FOUR threads deleted in rapid succession? That is a bit out of control really. Or someone's power trip?

Did they get the intern back?

Oh bollux. There was a link on that thread I really wish I'd saved. It was to a blog about feminism and why feminists do not want equality with men. Does anyone still have that?

That was possibly Jessica Eaton's article

victimfocus.wordpress.com/2018/08/04/why-i-dont-want-to-become-equal-to-men/

victimfocus.wordpress.com/2018/08/04/why-i-dont-want-to-become-equal-to-men/

There you go!

Oops. Cross post!

thenightsky, was it Jessica Eaton's recent blog post? It's on her twitter feed if you follow her.

So many x-posts

Thank you!!! that was it.

I don't do twitter.

There seems to be another thread for Dr Christian
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325668-Dr-Christian-Jessen-problem-with-feminists-or-just-controversial

But I did finally snap and after days of not reporting began reporting all of the insults, attacks and assumptions about me.

Oh no! Not insults, attacks and assumptions!

Perhaps you need some Incredibly Sturdy Pyjamas, they hold you up when you are feeling' down; and are very protective against all attacks. Fact.

Insults and assumptions; well, this is the internet. You think that was bad, try being told to DIE IN A FIRE [endlessly] for being bothered about women and girls. Or reported to your employer for WRONG THINK and losing your job, which your family relies on for...oh hang on - that is why they do it isn't it? So that you know your family will struggle and it will just SHUT THE WOMEN UP.

It does seem to be delete all of the threads day.