Nonnymouse
Well-known member
Understood, but how is what I am doing different to people talking to her on Twitter and then talking about it on here? They seem to be lauded. I think what I'm doing is even less 'harmful as I'm just doing a short bit i've been invited to do, not sending veiled or otherwise messages.I think more people get nervous when it's directly linked, mostly because it makes it much easier for anyone who's discussed to make the claim of 'harrassment' and a 'gathering of bullies'. I think the problem is that you are, I believe, acting in good faith, that doesn't mean that your actions will necessarily be interpreted that way the person being discussed.
I've stayed away from this, before now, because I can see both sides, though I did mention it in relation to someone else way way back. I've just checked the rulebook <thumbs pages, looks over glasses> and it says:
Keep it on tattle, and don't encourage any behaviour that could be seen as harassment.
I think the discussion is coming in because some people (and I probably, when I'm not getting splinters in my arse, am one) take that first bit as meaning that you don't engage with whoever you're talking about AND link it to/on Tattle, because it could then be seen as straying towards the 2nd part of that sentence. I, personally, choose not to engage with JM at all, and if I did I wouldn't say it was me here, because that blurs the line between 'water cooler chat' if you like and joining the two together.
HOWEVER (ow, my poor bum), I can see that it can be read as criticism is reserved for here and engaging in non-confrontational/non-harrassy ways would be absolutely fine. I can see why you'd think that, and we all get to make our choices.
I like to keep things simple, for myself, so I keep my social media interaction with JM to watching through my fingers and making mildly horrified faces at my screen.
Anyway, I'd rather be here having a constructive conversation than on Mumsnet where I feel the need to shower every time I log out.