TAAT, sorry... "Tell MNHQ why you use Mumsnet"

[CAAKE]

So many posters on this thread are saying they're on MN for the FWR boards, so I thought it was worth popping it over here to say THANK YOU to the wonderful GC posters who keep this bastion of sanity going 👊

Tell MNHQ why you use Mumsnet:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3377940-Tell-MNHQ-why-you-use-Mumsnet

I lurk to increase my understanding of feminism and the issues. I don't post because I'm not as articulate as others and I'm worried about being banned for saying something wrong. I occasionally read aibu.

Please post your answers to 'why you use MumsNet on the Site Stuff thread! This is a side-discussion to avoid derailing the purpose of that one.

I don't post because I'm not as articulate as others and I'm worried about being banned for saying something wrong.

Some of the most pithy posts recently have been by someone who says they're not good with words. And it's highly unlikely that anyone would be banned for a first offence unless it was a truly blatant breach of guidelines.

I think the popularity of the Feminist boards proves there’s a need for feminism that is about women and girls’ needs.

I felt very disconnected from current feminism (as I was reading about in The Guardian and on the net) and coming here has highlighted why that it.

Feminism is not a movement to soothe men. It is to enrich the lives of women.

I'm one of the many, many lurkers. One day I'll join in, but in the meantime I'm reading, absorbing, agreeing, finding ways to articulate my feelings about these issues. It is SUCH an important place.

I tried some' pro-women' posting on Digital Spy last weekend and got a seven day ban and told I was transphobic by the mods (probably male)within 24 hrs for pointing out some basic biology.

MN moderation may seem harsh at times, but it really isn't compared to other sites

Gosh. Hadn't opened that thread as I didn't expect it to go like that. The fourth post says it all really.

I want to pick up on a post by @RedToothBrush without derailing the main thread:

• Oh yes, the anonymity is an essential part of MN. After being the victim of abuse on the internet for many years, MN was a welcome relief from that. It helped contribute to the collapse in confidence in myself. Its difficult to break out of and does disportionately affect women.

I am very concerned about moves to stop anonymity on social media.

It would be the death of MN and women's ability to speak freely.*

Apart from being vital for abuse victims, it's absolutely crucial on a parenting site so that we can preserve our children's anonymity. I've got an unusual surname, I'd never have posted under it on the parenting issue which first brought me to MN many years ago (under a different NN) because it'd be embarrassing for my DC if someone came across it.

Personally, I wouldn't mind MNHQ having my true identity (over and above email) if it was 100% unhackable - but we know it isn't.

Erroll you'll want to read this:

amp.theguardian.com/media/2018/sep/30/social-media-anonymity-ban-debate-trolls-abuse--jess-phillips-jamie-bartlett?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=TRUE
Should anonymous social media accounts be banned?
There are growing calls for an end to people being able to hide their identity online. But is this a threat to free speech? Labour MP Jess Phillips and tech author Jamie Bartlett swap ideas

I note that Jess talks about ending anonymity because it would help her to speak as a woman with power

The problem is that's at odds with so many women who need anonymity online, and would not be able to speak about everyday boring things or get support potentially which might save their lives in someway.

I do feel Jess is doing a lot of women a disservice because her needs seem to trump theirs.

The problem isn't anonymity in so far as I can see it anyway. The abuse that comes out of anonymity is a sympton of a wider social and political problem. Its not the cause of it.

yes RTB, your comments about anonymity really made me think (as does most of your content tbf)

i'm a bit slow, so I'd never really seen before the FWR and the relationships board are two sides of the same coin. as much feminist consciousness goes on in relationships as FWR for sure

Ok... so what she seemed to want was not necessarily an end to 'front end' anonymity, but verifiability, a way to hold someone accountable for criminal posts at least?
I am not for one second suggesting that everyone has to appear as who they are online. Have a pseudonym, keep your anime avatar or hammer and sickle for all the reasons you have outlined, but someone should be able to trace who you are. You should have to be verifiable by someone.

I agree with that, in theory. In practice, in a world of servers in Columbia and hacking of even the big players like Facebook- it doesn't really seem achievable.

Who controls the databases? And who has access to them?

Women in particular won't trust them.

Wow, it’s currently at 27 pages and 99% of posters mention FWR as their reason for staying around.

Says it all really !!

There's absolutely nothing in the thread title or it's OP that should be causing disproportionate 'self-selection' of feminists, is there? I found it on active convos. Why isn't it a 'pinned thread' though, so that everyone is bound to see it?

someone should be able to trace who you are. You should have to be verifiable by someone

MNHQ knows who we are. There was a huge concern at the time of the MN data breach (by a TA intern) that user's ISPs had been leaked.

I think all MNHQ has is an email address. I'm not sure, but my guess is that would allow normal bona fide users to be tracked down by the police but that people with bad intentions can obscure themselves?

MNHQ knows who we are.

Do you think every poster registers in their own real name? And do you think MN has the capacity to check this?

If you think they do, then you really don't want to explore other parts of the internet.

An IP is not a name or address. It can help identify one but its not as easy as that.

I use the example of a game I once played. There were people with 100s of social media accounts, just so they could cheat. The people who ran the game didn't want to tackle it, because they got advertising revenue. In the end it destroyed the game for everyone.

I can see it happening to social media in its entirety to be honest, or it ending up something that only an elite group with power are able to use, because it become a tool to reflect their own political views - without one else banned, bullied out or self silenced out of fear.

The pattern of what has happened in the gaming community is closely repeating on a much larger scale in politics - with many from the gaming community having particular power because they understand the technology and because they have experience in manipulating the rules. Many are actively seeing politics on social media as almost like a game rather than something that has profound implications in real life.

You'll often see the theme of 'winning' an argument at all costs - often with the goal to drive someone off social media, the idea of sides - almost as if its goodies v baddies, personalities which are not real life ones. These all have their roots in gaming.

I just went onto active for the first time in ages

9/50 of the threads were from feminism chat, so nearly 20%

hadn't realised how much we were popping up in active.....

wonder if that's part of the reason for the site stuff thread