Rules - Mumsnet & Gransnet discrepancies

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Emily49

But surely posts can’t be deleted and posters even banned just because other posters say so? There must be moderation, with guidelines, e.g. racism, sexism, etc. One can’t surely just contact GNHQ and request a post be deleted, “because I don’t like if”?

It’s more complex than this

Emily49

But surely posts can’t be deleted and posters even banned just because other posters say so? There must be moderation, with guidelines, e.g. racism, sexism, etc. One can’t surely just contact GNHQ and request a post be deleted, “because I don’t like if”?

That is what I'm wondering too Emily

suziewoozie

Emily49

But surely posts can’t be deleted and posters even banned just because other posters say so? There must be moderation, with guidelines, e.g. racism, sexism, etc. One can’t surely just contact GNHQ and request a post be deleted, “because I don’t like if”?

It’s more complex than this

But then it should be made clear! Which, to be fair, is what the thread is about.

GNHQ? Cooeee!!

The guidelines are, like all guidelines, subject to interpretation. But unless there’s a report in the first place, nothing happens. That’s why I think that in some cases the context is important as it’s not always clear cut that a post should be deleted ( or at what point a poster shoukd be banned). Reporting is a powerful weapon and like all powerful weapons should be used responsibly rather than for more nefarious reasons. Atm on here I think that many posts on the various RF threads cross a lot of lines and do the site no credit

But surely posts can’t be deleted and posters even banned just because other posters say so? There must be moderation, with guidelines, e.g. racism, sexism, etc. One can’t surely just contact GNHQ and request a post be deleted, “because I don’t like if”?

No, of course a poster won’t be banned or posts deleted just because other posters say so, the posts have to fall into a grey area, and I suppose therein lies the problem.
Obviously I will not repeat what FC said about the Royal family, but I did read it and thought it was very distasteful about a man of almost 100 just leaving hospital.
But did I report it? No.
Am I surprised other people reported it? No.

Isn't a large part of what is posted on GN 'speculation'?

the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence

Does that mean that all posts now need to backed up with evidence??

I've just had a scan through a few threads that are in active.
A couple are rife with rumour, gossip and speculation
I really would have preferred it if I'd been told that my posts were removed because some posters found them disrespectful, or some such.

N&G yes, the more that one thinks about it, the dafter it is

But I have seen posts where a poster says something derogatory about another poster and are not castigated, I guess because no one reported it. Some posters are a bit bombproof, though? Because they’ve been around a long time / allowances made for various reasons? I don’t know / fairly new to it all, but it doesn’t feel very democratic.

No, no, we mustn’t get to the point where posts are removed because some posters ‘find them disrespectful or some such’

Emily49

But I have seen posts where a poster says something derogatory about another poster and are not castigated, I guess because no one reported it. Some posters are a bit bombproof, though? Because they’ve been around a long time / allowances made for various reasons? I don’t know / fairly new to it all, but it doesn’t feel very democratic.

It really is all about reporting yes.

But a moderator wont have seen them because they wont have been reported. If I say Judy Dench once had an affair with Boris Johnson it will only get deleted if someone reports it. If no one is bothered it will remain. If someone gets upset it will be deleted because it breaks guidelines.

Esspee

I can go one better. I made a light hearted topical joke about a capon on a thread on Gransnet. Within 10 mins it was removed and I was sent a warning email. I was furious and the resulting argument got me banned for a week.
A few months later on another thread I deliberately posted the same definition to see how quickly it would be deleted. It wasn’t.
This suggests to me that someone reporting you is the criteria.
Problem is this can be done anonymously. I have on occasion reported a post myself. I usually then post “reported” within the thread. If you don’t do that then the individual has no idea who reported them so this can be used vindictively.
The solution is for us all to petition GNHQ to specify who reported it when a deletion is made.

I think you’re bang on the nail here Espee. I remember feeling shocked on one discussion thread a couple of years back (can’t recall it) when a lady poster said along the lines of ‘I very rarely post and prefer to read but I do report quite often if I feel the need arises’.

What the heck?
?

Galaxy

But a moderator wont have seen them because they wont have been reported. If I say Judy Dench once had an affair with Boris Johnson it will only get deleted if someone reports it. If no one is bothered it will remain. If someone gets upset it will be deleted because it breaks guidelines.

Exactly and if you’re a JD fan and reported a post that said she was overhyped, that wouldn’t get deleted obviously.

Kandinsky thank you for not reporting me!
You mention the word 'distasteful', which probably is the real reason for the deletions.
That opens a huge can of worms, if you bring matters of 'taste' into it!

Emily49

No, no, we mustn’t get to the point where posts are removed because some posters ‘find them disrespectful or some such’

I think we’ve already arrived at that point Emily.
?

Part of the trouble with the whole reporting thing is we have a culture of being offended. Quite frankly, if you try hard enough you can be offended about just about everything !!

Reporting is so very often subjective not objective.

I’ve only ever reported completely unacceptable wind up posts, or offensive ones. (Thinking of one with a photo of his penis outside his underpants!) ? Don’t think anyone else saw it as it disappeared double quick.

I just ignore posts that I really don’t like.

I remember feeling shocked on one discussion thread a couple of years back (can’t recall it) when a lady poster said along the lines of ‘I very rarely post and prefer to read but I do report quite often if I feel the need arises’.

Urmston this reminds me of when the late Jings started a really funny but apt thread, entitled something like 'would the silent majority speak the f*ck up'.

This was after GNHQ said we had to take into consideration the feelings of the silent majority, that is members/non-members who view but don't post. How and why should posters have to take such people into consideration? We're not mind readers!

NanaandGrampy

Part of the trouble with the whole reporting thing is we have a culture of being offended. Quite frankly, if you try hard enough you can be offended about just about everything !!

Reporting is so very often subjective not objective.

I still think there’s more going on than being ‘offended’ wrt reporting ie who posted not what they posted.

Agreed N&G.

I just wish GNHQ would send one a p.m. saying ‘you’ve been reported’. Rather than ‘it’s against our guidelines’. It’s the same thing in essence I suppose but - the first suggestion highlights the fact that GNHQ had not spotted the infraction themselves - a poster had alerted them.

I think you’re right sw. Sadly.

NanaandGrampy

Part of the trouble with the whole reporting thing is we have a culture of being offended. Quite frankly, if you try hard enough you can be offended about just about everything !!

Reporting is so very often subjective not objective.

Yes. I got roundly ticked off for my comments, which I stand by, but I whole accept that others were in their rights to complain about them, especially if complaints were fuelled in by fondness for the Queen.
I think that this is a far more adult way of dealing with things ie among ourselves, rather than relying upon 'telling the teacher' who then ticks you off on their behalf!

But if I reported Suzie for saying 'Its really all about reporting yes', it wouldnt get deleted, I and 50 others could report that sentence and it would remain because it doesnt break guidelines.