MNHQ want money from us

[JellySlice]

Perhaps now is the time to tell MNHQ what we want from them.

eg
Relaxation of the anti-women censorship rules.
Reinstating banned respected posters like LangCleg.

I'm not convinced that your interventions are helping to achieve your goal so far.

No me neither But at least it's being said/getting out there. I'm assuming that at least a few people will be thinking, hmm, maybe MNHQ aren't craven, controlling fuckers after all. .. maybe they have paid a serious price for not shutting this debate down like most other platforms. That will have to do me.

4) No ability to change User Name [] "Admin" saying that this might be done by "Admin" if someone requests it. However, lots of people arguing that the ability to change User Names is responsible for trolling and do not accept that it can be a necessary protection for some users.

I've nosed at that site, and note that there is zero acknowledgement from whoever set it up that the ability to namechange might be the difference between life and death for a poster in a really really bad place. Although by the same token, the lack of MN in pointing it out as a USP doesn't reflect well there either.

FWIW in terms of the people from MNHQ I've interacted with directly some have been lovely and others less so. It's been a mixed bag, like most companies.

This other site sounds like it would lose the ability to function entirely if Admin got ill or had some other real life thing to attend to and wasn't able to be around for a while, which isn't ideal. Fine if it's small and stays that way but not if there's any intention of scaling up.

I haven’t heard anyone say MNHQ is craven. Badly advised at times though, yes.

I don’t appreciate the shroud waving over FWR. If it doesn’t work for MNHQ then Justine should have the courage of her convictions and shut it down. Or accept that it is a true value source for MN and own it.

The caveats and vacillations make MNHQ look amateur. They need better comms advice for sure.

Probably better not to get into a debate here (apologies for any derailing). I only intended to highlight other options. Any one of us could be banned for saying god knows what at any time.

Just for clarification on that main info thread (linked above), admin mentioned that they would change usernames if an individual requests it for eg privacy/safety concerns.

I am a very good person and resisted testing the other forum to see what I could post . I wonder if people that can not be named can be named?

Naming someone who's not allowed to be named and connecting them to the fetish that must not be named would be the obvious test.

I haven’t heard anyone say MNHQ is craven. Badly advised at times though, yes.

Site operation aside (which is painful at the best of times, as "the other site" shows) my biggest bellyache about MN is the consistency - well total and utter lack thereof - in moderation decisions. Which is something that has changed over the years. And not in a good way. It seems threads are pulled for the weakest of reasons - reasons that MNHQ would have rejected 5 years ago. Which is annoying. However the nadir came (for me) when in a contentious thread another poster stated that I had reported them and caused their post to be pulled and that I was a sneak, a coward and a lowlife. Only it wasn't me that reported them - as MNHQ confirmed in the very email where they refused to remove the accusatory post as well it's not MN policy to derail debate. I kinda lost interest then, really ...

I know you think it sounds rousing and powerful, but in fact you do nothing but reveal your naivety when you map the dynamics of controlling relationships onto the completely different and much, much more nuanced commercial relationships between a large number of parties (multiple advertisers, MNHQ, MN users generally, FWR users).

You are entirely incorrect about this which any first year economics text would explain.

Lol. You read different first year economics texts from me then.

A couple of thoughts:
MN can't compete on free speech grounds with sites based abroad. I can be very blunt on Tumblr but I can't here.
MN setting up ad-hoc payments would make it impossible for them to predict their income. Like a zero hours contract.
MN probably are concerned that donations from unsavoury types could be used against them. A screenshot showing PewDiePie donating £1000 (which he could do for a laugh as he's loaded) would cause mayhem.
We need to discuss where to move to even if that move doesn't happen for another couple years.

FlyingOink - "We need to discuss where to move to even if that move doesn't happen for another couple years."

In another couple of years the alternatives that currently exist might have disappeared or changed significantly, others will have come and gone, MN itself will have changed if it survives Covid-19.

It was obvious from the discussion in the original thread on Premium Membership in Site Stuff that different people want different things from MN in terms of the FWR Board. Also that some people would rather that FWR, or in fact the whole of MN as a business, did not exist at all.

To go back to the OP, what do I want from Mumsnet . . . on the principle that you don't know what you've lost 'till it's gone, I'd like MN to keep some features that it is easy to take for granted but which many other sites lack:

• publicly "archiving" posts when members close their accounts or are banned, ie. not deleting them and therefore maintaining a bloody amazing public archive

• enabling easy changes of User Name within an account, securely tying alternative User Names to an individual account and not "recycling" old User Names when accounts are closed/banned

• allowing "open access" to read Talk Boards but restricting all other Talk Board features to members, eg. posting content, search.

• maintaining high standards of accessibility across the site, including a simple, "no frills" Talk Board design with good visual contrast, all "control buttons" on display and ability to "Customise" key aspects.

Plenty more but that will do for now.

"you don't know what you've lost GOT 'till it's gone"

I will also pay if they bring back Lang

I don't think I'll be making my way to that new Mums.chat site.

Top of the board is an AIBU - "To hope Mumsnet dies a death".

Honestly, I've been on MN since 2009, and I never hope that it dies a death. Who are these people that are so vitriolic against MN? Former members? MRAs? TRAs? Over and over, I see people who want to shut MN down - and the only answer that I can think of is the hatred of women/women's forums and "women talking in groups are dangerous" reason referred to in the Spectator article linked above.

TheFlushedZebra - "Who are these people that are so vitriolic against MN?"

I wonder who they are too, given that:

• they set up a forum called "MumsDOTchat"

• with several "starter boards"

• but forgot to include one about . . . "Parenting"

You couldn't make it up!

archive.is/l5VL1#selection-2319.4-2349.10

From my own perusal, looks like mostly current and former MN-ers... other than that thread, seems mostly peaceable to me

I most certainly don’t want MN to die a death either, At all! I think people are disgruntled that many have paid gbp 50 when already in dire straits, yet got nothing in return

Others who offered no string donations have been ignored

I’m sure MN will weather the storm - they have many loyal users. I think the more sites the better

What I want to know, is whether banned posters (from here) like Lang will join over there .. I wonder if this development could actually be welcomed by MN? if posters they may not like drift away, but without all the drama of banning ?

TheFlushedZebra - "Who are these people that are so vitriolic against MN

I think certain posters are vitriolic about everything. It upsets some people but they are revealing, and responding to, their anger with things in their own lives - I find I can easily ignore. Others need to do the same and not rise to the bait.

I agree with MoleSmokes yesterday at 16:19 (iirc). The spamming is crass and a bit tedious too. Build your own membership based on a solid reputation.

The posters on here asking others to pay and pleading for them to do so, is fucking gross. If you want to pay to be overly moderated and then be blamed for HQs own choice to add extra rules, then fine, go ahead but do not ask others too. There are plenary of other forums out there if this one disappears.

The other site is just a tiny chat forum. There is loads about the internet.
What makes a difference on MN is the volume of posters.

People got fussed when spinsters opened too. I wonder why.

I haven't been on there, but Spinsters serves a specific need.
If FWR stopped existing I suspect most would migrate there. MN is wider than that.