Lang Cleg 2

[TiredofthisBSbutIstandwithLang]

New thread as we got to 1000.

Surely Lang repeatedly said that MNHQ was being coercively controlled? Not that MNHQ were the agents, ie doing the coercive controlling?

This was definitely my understanding - MNHQ moderators are being coercively controlled by the TRAs who flock here from twitter to call us names and report our posts.

Possibly there is a mix-up because some here refer to those mass-reporting TRAs as "our monitors" - and thought they meant the MN mods.

Oh seriously @MNHQ, @MichaelMumsnet, this is a bit dim really isn’t it. Receipts for the accusation that Lang accused you of coercive control? She was repeatedly, patiently, robustly pointing out that you are subject to and facilitating coercive control of gender critical women by trans-activists. You’re being played, and you’re not listening to your user base.

Seriously, everyone at MNHQ should be trained up in this. And whilst I have your attention, @MichaelMumsnet, please stop using the “haranguing” and “shouting” language about us, it’s a nasty accusation that has an impact on user wellbeing and it's one of the places where we draw the line. We don't think your users should have to be 'robust' in the face of rudeness. It makes for an unpleasant and demotivating public environment, and we don't think it's too much to ask that moderators avoid being rude to users in the first place.

Are MNHQ big enough to admit that this has been misunderstood? That is the question.

It’s not an Out There suggestion either. They will have the relevant training for moderating a large, varied community, plus diversity training, safeguarding....specific issues such as self harm and suicide etc.
Why not Coercive Control training?

No one stormed into MN Towers and slapped a copy of Why Does He Do That? on MichaelMN’s desk and it just looks silly to pretend that the equivalent online has happened.

Just to be clear about the rudeness in question - it came down to repeated accusations that we're coercively controlling. It's a nasty accusation that has an impact on staff wellbeing and it's one of the places where we draw the line.

@MichaelMumsnet I'm a specialist nurse. When I give someone a devastating diagnosis I don't acuse them of having a condition or illness, I present the facts.

I explain it to them. I make sure that they and their families understand how the diagnosis has been arrived at and what it means. Sometimes people get angry with me and my colleagues, because they don’t want to hear what I’m telling them. I understand their anger, but here’s the thing - It doesn't make them any less ill.

I stand with Lang and you are angry with the wrong person.

I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but you are experiencing coercive control. I can see it and so can countless other posters. It simply isn't anything else. Lang and others have explained it to you and provided additional information to help you understand it better. Please hear what they are telling you.

@JustineMNHQ Coercive control has a huge impact on staff well-being. May I ask why, as an employer are you not taking this seriously?

The skills the mods would learn from the Freedom Programme would be useful elsewhere on the site too. 20 years of the Relationships board unanimously telling women to LTB must’ve resulted in hundreds if not thousands of angry exes seeking revenge?

@michaelmumsnet and @justinemumsnet, thanks for your responses. I can understand that it's not appropriate for you to share private messages from a poster, and that you need to maintain the well-being of staff. It's no good continually losing hard-working mods to burnout!

I would really appreciate further detail, however, about what falls within the "unacceptably robust" category.

Many of us do not intend abuse or aggression but may express ourselves strongly or bluntly. Sometimes this is due to being from a different culture or being on the spectrum, or simply being at a point in one's life when one believes it's ok for women to be blunt (as long as we're not abusive) rather than softening everything we say (maybe we're gender nonconforming in that way!)

How can we help reduce the burden on your moderation team, while ensuring that posters with a valuable contribution aren't banned unnecessarily, and have an open debate on controversial issues? If being robust isn't acceptable, how can we learn to judge that better?

Or is it possible that robustness canbe ok after all? As someone from another culture who struggles with British norms sometimes, I find this very worrying.

stillathing I think they have taken offence, clearly. Weird, huh. I wonder what training they do have, to do this job? You'd think some kind of conflict resolution / anti bullying / safeguarding would be part of it.

@JustineMumsnet Thank you for responding to our concerns. However, I'm rather worried by this part of your message.

we just can’t exist in a situation where users are persistently aggressive towards, and disparaging of, our moderation team, who are simply trying to do a fair and decent job applying our guidelines. We’ve been pretty clear about this: from my statement on moderation principles for discussions around gender identity and sex ‘One thing we can simply no longer tolerate, however, is rudeness and aggression towards our mod team’.

Are you seriously telling us that Langcleg was rude and aggressive towards the moderators and that was the reason she has been permanently excluded?

As so many other posters have already pointed out, that doesn't ring true at all. Langcleg might sometimes be goaded to using a bit of gentle sarcasm, but she was a prolific contributor and nobody can ever remember her being rude or aggressive, even under extreme provocation.

Did you actually see any rude and aggressive messages? Or did someone else condense the information for you and serve it up with a heavily biased slant of their own? Perhaps someone who feels particularly sensitive when the moderation team is reminded by knowledgeable women that they are being played by masters of the art of coercive control?

As others have already said, this decision is damaging to the mumsnet brand. You might need to look into what really happened a bit more closely. Banning an unfailingly polite and kind expert in safeguarding because she repeatedly pointed out that your moderation policy is fatally flawed is not a good look.

Please investigate what really happened for yourself, and then reinstate Langcleg with an apology.

I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but you are experiencing coercive control. I can see it and so can countless other posters. It simply isn't anything else. Lang and others have explained it to you and provided additional information to help you understand it better. Please hear what they are telling you.

Yes this. We can all see it. This latest banning and ensuing fallout out has highlighted it a hundred times over.

it came down to repeated accusations that we're coercively controlling

This is completely wrong, so terribly wrong.
It was not about the moderators of Mumsnet using coercion to control the users of this site. NOT ever that. I watched Lang Cleg try to make it clear that she understood the pressures that the moderators are under, but she did feel quite strongly that the moderators of Mumsnet were being coercively controlled by outside monitors/activists.

Activists that scrutinise every single word that's written here. Activists who take genuine delight in getting posters banned.
As you can see by the screenshots up thread. Activists that band together and flood MNHQ with complaints.

That's why Lang Cleg kept on about MNHQ moderators doing the Freedom programme.
Not because the moderators are a bunch of bullies but because she felt that they, themselves were being bullied by external monitors. Sick twisted individuals that really want women to stop talking.
As for the reports coming from regular users, if you gave me 20 minutes I could give you a list of regular users who are out and out anti women activists.
They're really easy to spot, just because someone is a regular user of FWR it doesn't make them a guaranteed good person that only wants the best for women.
I really and truly think that MNHQ have got this one wrong, they have been mistaken.

[quote Mossyrock]@MichaelMumsnet I think that you have misunderstood.

Yes, Lang's view, as I understood it, was that the moderators were subject to coercive control by the monitors (i.e. those activists who monitor posts on FWR and target various posters for deletion - see the Twitterer above).[/quote]

It's been repeatedly asserted that we were both abusers and proxies for abuse at various times - and the distinction doesn't feel very important when you're on the receiving end of it.

no idea what you are all talking about..

Probably used to that tho?

@MichaelMumsnet I read many of Lang's posts. I don't remember her once saying that you were coercively controlling but believed you were being coercively controlled. In which case there is no justification for her ban and someone has made a bad judgement call.

And to prove my point, the weird threads are now appearing

Oh dear. Can we just chalk this up to a huge misunderstanding re the coercion thing?

@michaelmumsnet as someone who was subject to coercive control and abuse myself, I know with complete confidence that there is no shame in having been in that position.

Likewise, there is no shame in undergoing training to help you understand how to deal with being subjected to it and how best to deal with it. It's what saved my life!

Is Mumsnet hq taking this threat to the well-being of its staff seriously?

I understand it isn’t nice to be accused of being used by someone to bully, target and silence. Must make you feel pretty stupid, I know I would.
Digging in and refusing to make that distinction is childish and wrong.

I didn’t appreciate your language about haranguing either.

I get that this is difficult. But the platform and the guidelines are yours not ours. And on this topic they are not working. So rather than errr stonewall everybody (sorry but that is the right word to use in its original context) you need to come up with something more workable. It’s clearly not working well right now since everyone is angry - MNHQ and the users. Oh but the TRAs are happy so there’s that.

How does one send a PM to the mods anyway?

I'm on the app if that helps.

Asking for a mate..

Are there three little dots on the bottom right of each post? There are on the mobile/desktop versions. If so you click those and it gives you the option to PM the post author. They are there for mods and members, but I’ve never tried PMing a mod, personally.

So what are MNHQ going to do about the current situation, where abusive males are crowing on Twitter about how they can manipulate Mumsnet?

At least some firming up about who you accept reports from?

"Harranguing" = not doing as we are told/not behaving nicely.

Ffs.

There is a "Contact us" link at the very bottom of the page. @michaelmumsnet was very prompt and courteous with his reply to me which is much appreciated under the circumstances!