Bunbury’s Public Service Announcement 2

[arranbubonicplague]

The useful Bunbury Guide to Spotting Community Disruptors is constantly evolving.

The best research and advice is not to engage with community disruptors and trolls. As ever, if you suspect troll activity, report it to MNHQ.

This is a continuation of the first Public Service Announcement thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3321127-public-service-announcement

If and when you see threads plopped into FWR, especially a curious repeat of well worn topics, maybe check for poster history before engaging.

There are a number of posts/posters/threads that are reproduced on Twitter or Facebook to foment controversy using screen shots & flagging to either MNHQ to have threads or posters deleted. Sometimes, it’s used to approach commissioning editors with ideas for articles. It’s a tiresome tactic that we’ve had several community disruptor posters who themselves post the comments that they then highlight elsewhere as purported evidence of racism, religious intolerance, anti-men sentiments, or transphobia.

Some helpful links in following posts.

There's something not quite right.

No, I do not either. My DD would rather die than post on MN it has to be said, although I did entertain her with the Protestant traybake thread (who knew?) and the one about school reviews based on high school fiction.

Awful lot of effort gone into it if it's just fishing. I admit I'm convinced, but if you aren't, what would it take to convince you? What would a real one look like?
This is how far it's gone, that no one can trust anything any more. Someone, somewhere, is cheering.

I can imagine one of my sons being that composed, intense and articulate but he's 23. Maybe our visitor is just mature for their years?

I don't reply, other than with great scepticism and no actual content, to posters who start threads but have no posting history.

I agree with Lass. Most people wanting to join a forum will start contributing to discussions before Making a Big Announcement about themselves.

You're playing a blinder on the payment for sexual service thread Lass.

Thank you. I did advance search that poster. We crossed swords on the paedophilia is a sexual orientation thread and another prostitution thread.

Good point, Lass and Lang. I'd normally go along with that but so far the op has been intelligently and respectfully engaged while gathering nothing worthy of sharing with the Twitter mob. And if your understandable scepticism turns out to be justified, they are demonstrating an extraordinary degree of doublethink.
What would a genuine, bright, GC teenager sound like? Where would they look for support?

It's partly that rather than asking for help, advice, etc, it was posted as an AMA - why? Then, the amount of wokeness described sounds like no school I've ever known (and I do go into schools regularly for work).

How could they ever convince you of their bona fides?

(Rhetorical question)

Sound slightly more like a teenager.

Oh, you mean like Greta Thunberg?

Sorry, that sounded snarkier than I intended. But there are lots of different teenagers and mine was more the Thunberg type.

It does help if people can keep their story straight for three or four posts in a row.

I’m skeptical, it sounds a bit audience-tailored to me. Happy to be proved wrong though!

Well, without wishing to be mean and exclusionary, I can see how there might be quite an emotional payoff for being accepted and welcomed as something of an against-the-grain teen in a setting like FWR on MN where we talk openly and earnestly about our concern for women and children caught up in the maelstrom of the trans juggernaut. Were I to meet such a young person face to face, I would be all kinds of interested and no doubt have many questions. However, given the much more ephemeral nature of the internet, which has clearly been the nurturing cradle of diverse and less than healthy behaviour I am less inclined to encourage something which sounds at best like the only safe outlet for putative young person which isn't a sensible thing, and could also be anything from a desire for celebrity or the kudos of acceptance into something which some perceive to be a community hostile to newcomers. I'm aware that sounds a little cruel, but as my son says, my spidey senses are tingling.

I wondered about authenticity as the AMA format has been over-used recently and the school sounded quite extreme. But as Floral says, we may never know. However one of the posters asked a great question, which was if the OP's parents knew they were chatting on Mumsnet to adults. The OP said things about their own mental state which made me feel that if genuine they would be better supported elsewhere than on a chat group with strangers. I think the AMA format is unlikely to benefit someone already feeling vulnerable.

More generally I wonder if we could have a few principles if a self-declared minor approaches the group - something that we could stick up like 1. We welcome the voices of young people 2. We ask young people under 18 to confirm that their parents are aware that they are chatting to adults on Mumsnet and their chosen topic 3. No MNer should ever swap private messages with a self-declared minor and 4. We suggest any young people in a state of distress contact (insert charity/support group - anyone?)

I like those ideas Forgotthebins

Yes, Forgotthebins your second paragraph is very much a practical answer to my issues with this one. It's all very talking about strong safeguarding, but we really need to be mindful of actually taking different steps to the cultish, glitter-family approach of those who have a poor understanding of these concerns.

We had a very vocal (supposedly) 16 year old user a couple of years ago, who worried me immensely. I was never sure if I would have preferred that she be genuine or actually a troll. I tended more towards believing she was a troll, and didn’t engage any more. One way or the other, there was a troubled human being on the other side of the screen.

I like those ideas Forgotthebins

Seconded.

I agree.

I suspect there are a surprising number of teenage lurkers, especially on the relationships board. My resident teenager-till-recently seems to read it in the way that previous teens read the problem page in Jackie Magazine. It is a good thing. They are coming across a lot of things for the first time: losing a friend to what appears to be a coercive relationship; a friend whose parents have quite a dysfunctional relationship; even a friend who was in care. MN helps confirm that people are supportive, that boundaries are important and that there are ways through. I would hope that some would choose to post if there is no one else they can speak to.

FWIW I think many young people are lovely. They are open minded, they care. But they also have a clear sense of priorities: the environment and the mental health crisis amongst their peers. They are increasingly wise to those claiming special status, and rarely interested in the antics of student politicians. My resident young person went to a talk given by a TG woman (part of their degree) with an open mind but came away unconvinced. No hormones, no surgery but a lot of arrogance about their special status. Ditto the BAME student leader posting anti-semitic stuff.

Young people are naive...obviously. But they will come to their own conclusions. As far as I can see the "oh Jeremy Corbyn" was fine when you were 16, but embassing a couple years late. Like yesterday's boy band.

I remember that poster sophocles, I was quite concerned about them. I think forgot thebins suggestions are very useful. I am quite concerned about young people being used as a ' gotcha' by certain groups.

Could we talk to mnhq about some guidelines specifically for young people maybe? I am not clear how it would work.