mumsnet have moved one of my threads without permission and effectivelly instructed us how we may or may not discuss things.

[stumbledin]

I started a thread on the newsnight programme from last night about the man eventually convicted of killing two women after years of police failure.

For reason known only to the irrational concepts of mumsnet they have moved it to the "chat" board.

This is on one level just plain daft as there is already a thread on there about this, so there didn't need to be another.

But I specifically chose to have it on this thread as this is more likely to be where women who understand about women's sex based oppression post and I wanted to interact with them.

On one level this is political censorship. They created the division so they will have to live with them.

Hosting a board does NOT entitle you to tell those using the service how to think.

So not only have they falsely labelled this board a debate about something none of us are talking about (gender) they are now, with out having the gumption to even spell it out, taking secret decisions about what is or is not appropriate.

mumsnet seems to have suddenly decided that because the board is popular means that what they think is right think. Whereas what makes it popular are the posters.

This is like those facebook groups where the group admins suddently go power mad and think they because they are the admin they are also the holder of all true thought.

This is like the interns have taken over from the adults.

this is l

@Whistfulwisteria

www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_94.htm

This is a great change model. In this Stumbledin you were insufficiently "unfrozen".

Any thoughts on the model?

Yeah, my thought is that its an interesting point you make there. And if analysed through the lens of change management, this board split would be an example of how not to do it, in my view.

So, if you're wanting to use Lewin's model, the first stage Unfreeze is about explaining the need for change and motivating your people to want to change. Unfortunately none of that happened here.

Of course what you are looking at is resistance/adaption to change in users, not management or staff.

Now I understand (I think) why MN wanted to make this change, but as we are not employees of MN, but its users, none of the change management model actually applies to us. It is better applied to Justine and her team.

P.S. I would suggest that you are misinterpreting stumbledin's meaning with the comparison to teens/toddlers. It's not a judgement of those who have welcomed or at the verly least acquiesced to the change that says we are teens/toddlers but a reflection on how she thinks posters on this board are being treated as if we were teens/toddlers.

P.S.S. I don't welcome the change, because I think it is counterproductive on all measures (i.e. for us and for what MN needs) but we are essentially sharecroppers here. Either you accept the rules and the structure of the board or you don't. I simply don't have the energy to fight something I don't have control over. But I'll certainly not judge anyone who has the passion to do so. I happen to know that tilting at windmills is not always the folly it seems to be.

Apologies if I've missed anything, but have you reported your thread, OP, and asked them to move it back? I wasn't pleased with where some of mine landed after the split, I asked and they were happy to move them.

^ resistance/adaptation

The model is both about employees and completely transferable to users, it's about human behaviour.

The size of the change affects how much unfreezing is needed and it's clear that this is the source of conflict. I expect mumsnet had a real dilemma about how possessive users/are.

I'm not at all misinterpreting Stumbledin. By implication those that have got on with it are happy in the mummies playground we are now speaking in. Challenging that as an insult is less about those getting on with it and more about the characterisation of us Stumbledin is forming, that we are passive children and not adults that are accepting of change without the need for extended handling through it.

please do not move this thread as it relates to women's sex-based oppression" in every OP

Exactly.

I do get the dilemma, I've been involved in change were I have objected on the grounds that it won't work and have been told I am resisting change.
It's the old denial conundrum, I'm not an alcoholic, yes that's what alcoholics say.

However 😜

Most of the objecting I can see are huge inflations of the glass half empty theory.

A board specialising in the debate we demanded (and I include myself in that) now exists.

Can't we 🥂?

I wrote celebrate and my phone changed it, before I get reported for biscuiting!

Blimey. Just, blimey.

stumbled

started a thread on the newsnight programme from last night about the man eventually convicted of killing two women after years of police failure

For reason known only to the irrational concepts of mumsnet they have moved it to the "chat" board

This is on one level just plain daft as there is already a thread on there about this, so there didn't need to be another

But I specifically chose to have it on this thread as this is more likely to be where women who understand about women's sex based oppression post and I wanted to interact with them

Well thats absolutely ridiculous, i think they should explain why they moved it

Decision tree:

Is it about the sex and gender identity debate.

Y - in the sex and gender board.
N - in the feminist chat board.

You're welcome.

And i agree with turquoise and i agree that stumbled did not compare us to children in any way shape or form

Just while I’m here…

I did get an email back saying they thought it was more suitable to be in "chat" even though I had pointed out there was an existing thread there about this.

I have said I dont accept their decision as it isn't their right to say the context in which I discuss things. ie the silly label they have made up doesn't alter the fact that this is still the feminism and women's rights board, as can be seen by the actual URL www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights (*) and that's where I wanted to have the discussion.

I have also asked for their formal complaints procedure.

(*) I presume they kept the original URL because obviously this has the most threads on it and it would be a massive job to change the web links of all the threads that have been created on here. And quite honestly if the genuinely believe that somehow there is a "debate" (where are these debate posts) why didn't they just create a new url / web link called Feminism Debate.

But it looks like mumsnet seem to think they are runnning a nursery school were naughtly toddlers need to be told how to right think.

I don't think I am in a nursery school being told how to right think.
I don't interpret anything mumsnet has done as putting me in a nursery school.

Stumbledin however is fairly insistent that I'm in a nursery school.

@Whistfulwisteria

But I specifically chose to have it on this thread as this is more likely to be where women who understand about women's sex based oppression post and I wanted to interact with them.

I think you are misunderstanding Justine and the mods emails.

Emails? Was this a Freudian slip?

Freud definitely wasn't alive when email was invented.

I'm with you, stumbled.

I thought people wanted to be able to ignore the 'sex and gender' topic, so why would people be asking for threads to be moved out of here and into the other one? Doesn't that defeat the whole point?

Well, unless the whole idea was just a diversionary tactic to cause strife, ill-will and confusion, and further irritate the mods. Just as well we're not watched, monitored, and maliciously reported by people who'd rather silence women, isn't it?

Don't be so cynical Arabella

Ok. I lasted 2 seconds before I did a real snort laugh.

Just as well we're not watched, monitored, and maliciously reported by people who'd rather silence women, isn't it?

why didn't they just create a new url / web link called Feminism Debate

Really, really good point.

@Whistfulwisteria

Freud definitely wasn't alive when email was invented.

Ok, let’s skip the Freudian element and skirting around the question and ask it directly:

Are you, Whistfulwisteria one of the people who Justine advised us of who had been corresponding by email about issues with this forum?

For reference:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/4267223-Any-chance-of-a-review-of-the-FWR-moderation-rules-in-light-of-Maya-Forstaters-success-in-court-please?msgid=108230991

To quote one email we received this morning, ‘There is definitely a sense that Feminism Chat is only a place to discuss gender critical feminism. Any posts which question GCism get flooded with hundreds of hostile responses. Which might be more fair if MN was an explicitly GC site, but it portrays itself as a space for all feminism.’

Feminism. For females.

Are we missing something here?

Yes. The sex & gender thread is like a thread entitled 'Science and Religion'.

Science (sex): Sydenham's Chorea is a neurological autoimmune disorder characterised by involuntary jerking motions and is caused by a Streptococcal infection.

Then religion comes in: No it is really St Vitus dance and people are dancing around involuntarily because they are possessed. How dare you mention bacteria, you possession deniers!!

Along comes Mumsnet, and the 'Willie Worshippers' who spy on us and any hateful scientific facts: Be kind and don't point out the superstitious nonsense is nonsense. Possession is a view worthy of respect. Science is so bigoted. Facts are not worthy of respect.

Are you, Whistfulwisteria one of the people who Justine advised us of who had been corresponding by email about issues with this forum?

No

A board specialising in the debate we demanded (and I include myself in that) now exists.

Who’s the ‘we’ here, because I don’t remember any of the FWR regulars even asking for a new board, let alone demanding one.

In fact I’d go as far as to say most FWR regulars didn’t even know that the decision had been made. There was no discussion / FWR user buy in requested by management.