There are many discussion groups on DU. Not all of those groups are popular with everyone.

[MineralMan]

I visit a few of them, and post in a couple. I'm even a host in the Health Group. Groups are very useful, and some even serve as safe havens where people can discuss issues without being attacked for what they believe or care about.

Most DU groups go unnoticed, except for the DUers who make use of those groups. A few groups occasionally become topics of conversation on the DU Forums, like GD. Generally, they get that status because some of the things posted in those groups are unpopular with some DUers.

And yet, those groups are still active, despite disapproval of them by some. Some have had to ban certain DUers from posting in a group to prevent being attacked.

DU Admins can open new groups and make existing groups go away. They rarely do the latter. Groups have specific functions on DU, and one of those functions appear to be to provide a place where unpopular ideas with some or ideas that are of little interest to most DUers can be discussed.

Today, Skinner had something to say about one group on DU, in the Ask the Administrators forum:

Skinner (58,303 posts)
1. Supporters of President Obama will always be welcome on Democratic Underground.

I am, myself, a very strong supporter of the President.

The Barack Obama group will be here as long as there are supporters on DU who want to post there.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12593607#post1

Since not everyone visits the ATA forum, I thought I'd post what he said here in DU.

N.B.: I don't post in the group Skinner mentioned.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

1. May I ask what prompted you to post this here?

[MineralMan]

3. I thought it would be informative.

Is that OK?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

4. No problem here

[MineralMan]

7. OK.

[Wait Wut]

15. Because of this Meta...I mean...GD thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3775248

Some people are suggesting that the BOG is a breeding ground for trolls or some fucked up shit.

This subthread is just one of a few:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023775248#post68

[Aerows]

53. Well and good

I take exception when Canadians that enjoy Universal Health Care and other benefits come on here and bash liberals who hope for the same thing in our nation. Since we actually live and VOTE here, and a substantial faction of those folks are not American citizens.

I have to question why they care so much about what we are doing in our own country.

[SidDithers]

54. ...

Sid

[Aerows]

55. Are you eligible to vote in the US?

Yes or No?

[SidDithers]

56. ...

Sid

[Aerows]

57. No answer

So you admonish people who CAN vote here about how they vote, but you aren't eligible. Brilliant strategy.

[SidDithers]

59. What's really funny...

is that you think you deserve the courtesy of an answer.

I ain't your monkey.

Sid

[Uncle Joe]

70. You have already answered Aerows with your non-answer.

Joe

[joshcryer]

84. I don't think that is relevant to post to DU.

Though the icon is obnoxious and I'm amazed that poster hasn't been at least selectively denied the ability to use it since it constitutes likely the majority of their posts...

[Uncle Joe]

94. Well I do believe using

this as the answer to most every post can make one go blind and it doesn't help D.U.'s vision either, that's the answer and the relevancy.

[ConcernedCanuk]

88. "I have to question why they care so much about what we are doing in our own country."

.
.
.

"I have to question why they care so much about what we are doing in our own country."

I'll try to answer your question.

First off - USA is our closest/only neighbor.

Anywhere I have lived, and there have been numerous dwellings, how my neighbor behaves affects me, sometimes unpleasantly so.

Pets run loose, shitting on my lawn, late loud noise, plowing/shoveling snow by my laneway, etc.

Neighbors have an impact.

I've had some neighbors who voluntarily come to assist me with a project, offer to plow my laneway for me, bring me a spare plate of dinner etc., so its not all bad.

Our cross-border experience is not as pleasant now with the Patriot Act, and all the increased delays at the border. Many of us have given up visiting the USA because of this, AND the abundance of personally owned handguns carried by US citizens is disturbing, - a habit that is allowed NOWHERE in Canada.

Neighbors have an impact.

Also, USA is our largest trading partner, so what happens with the USA's economy affects our economy greatly - so we pay attention - well, some of us.

USA's foreign policy affects us too - Chretien, our Prime Minister at the time, refused to let us get dragged into the Iraq invasion, or the attacks on Afghanistan. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to most of us Canucks, Martin(Chretien's successor) snuck us into Afghanistan, and our Harperslut is keeping us there.

So our interest is not solely about what you are doing in your own country, it is also about what you (not you personally, but especially the MIC/PNAC et al gang) do around the globe;

and we sure are not the ONLY country that cares what the USA does around the globe.

And the USA/MIC/PNAC gang is pretty busy all around the World.

Neighbors have an impact.

CC

[Skittles]

2. is someone saying that group should not exist?

I just ignore them

[Rex]

5. Just some CYA posting imo.

Nothing uncommon about it really, like you I just ignore them now.

[MineralMan]

6. Many things are said about the Barack Obama Group.

Since it's not a group I visit, I'm not involved with it. But it gets mentioned often here in GD, and not usually in a complimentary way. I'm an active participant in GD.

[Skittles]

67. they've booted many FINE progressives

look at all the accolades for Obama right now - for standing up and doing the right thing - that negates a lot of the so-called "hater" garbage thrown around DU

[Bolo Boffin]

69. ...who violated the SOP for the group. n/t

[Skittles]

76. yeah, and everyone now knows what THAT means

[rug]

71. 124, but the night is young.

[roguevalley]

78. I was in a hurry and read a thread. I posted a

brief reply to a poster and got banned. I had no idea that it was the BOG. You can get banned for sneezing. I never looked to see what groups or forums a topic is. I just add my opinion. I got banned first time ever. I think that sort of thing sticks sideways in craws. I wasn't a troll. I was just commenting. Got kicked in the ass for it too.

[Skittles]

79. take it as a Badge of Honor

yes INDEED

[roguevalley]

81. Okay. :D:D:D

I have to tell you, it really surprised me.

[joshcryer]

85. I've never been banned.

I am not exactly one to be completely behind Obama either. I just think he's consistent. And I don't go over there trashing them when Obama is consistently center-right. They might disagree with my view but that hasn't led to my being banned there.

[el_bryanto]

8. I only really go to the religion group

and GD - I don't know why people would discourage other DUers from visiting an Obama Group.

Oh wait - i know exactly why they would.

Bryant

[MineralMan]

9. I sometimes read in the Religion Group,

but rarely post there. It's in My Subscriptions, and religions are an interest of mine. I don't find a lot of discussions there I want to participate in, though.

[theHandpuppet]

49. I wish more people would visit the religion group

Rather than use LBN for their religious postings.

[DrDan]

10. let's be honest about that particular group

their bans are not (necessarily) based on "attacks".

I am banned from that group. It was as a result of a VERY SHORT post mentioning multi-dimensional chess. NO ONE WAS ATTACKED. I was there only because the post made the Latest Threads page.

There is one particular member of that group who is VERY prolific in his/her banning. I find more willingness to debate among the gunners than this group. Their purpose goes beyond support of the President. I have voted for the President, contributed, and worked on his campaign. I do NOT worship him, however. THAT is what this group is all about.

[MineralMan]

13. As I said, it's not a group where I participate.

Groups can make their own rules, from what I understand. Their hosts can block DUers from posting in the group. So, I'm not sure what to say, beyond that.

[DrDan]

19. I just wanted to address your point about "attacks"

I understand your point. I just am stunned that we have members here who thwart discussion.

Personal attacks are a different matter. Banning is appropriate in these instances - anywhere on DU (imo). My impression is that most bans in that group are based on differences of opinion related to policies, etc.

[Rex]

21. I know most of the people on that ban list or have conversed with them on DU.

They come from all walk of life and many have opposite views from each other on many things political. THAT is why I don't buy the BOGs assertion that it bans for attacks...hard to prove that with a list as diverse as their ban list is, imo.

[DrDan]

23. agree - many long-term members on that list

many variations of progressive thinking.

[zipplewrath]

46. Longest banned list on DU

Can't claim to have checked with every group. But near as I can tell, they have the longest banned list of any group. And by about an order of magnitude or so. They were over 100 last time I was checking.

[MineralMan]

22. As I said, I'm neither a subscriber nor a poster there.

So, I really can't comment on what the hosts there do.

My only awareness of that group comes from mentions of it and the people who do subscribe to it here on DU. There are a couple of other groups that sometime become topics in GD, as well, in a negative sense. It just seems unfortunate to me. Groups exist for a reason, and I wouldn't second guess the DU Admins regarding those reasons or the rules that govern DU Groups.

[NuclearDem]

11. Well, cooking and birdwatching aren't for everyone.

Oh, talking about the BOG.

[cthulu2016]

12. Skinner being clueless how to post this in GD if he wanted to, it's lucky

that a helpful pot-stirrer came to the rescue.

[MineralMan]

14. Thanks for taking the time to reply.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

18. ??????? n/t

[Benton D Struckcheon]

24. I just read the man's sig line,

id'ing who he is. Assuming it to be true (I have no reason to doubt it) I think you need to show a little more respect. Disagreement <> ad hominem. Your post is ridiculous.

[cthulu2016]

27. Respect for what?

For this silly flamebait OP that doesn't belong in GD?

For mineralman as an American institution?

For mineralman using Skinner as an involuntary human shield for his own agenda?

[Benton D Struckcheon]

32. Fine. n/t

[MineralMan]

45. No respect is required, of course.

I've never been called an "American institution" before, though. Pretty cool. I had no idea.

[rug]

72. So is Guantanamo.

[SidDithers]

16. DU rec...nt

Sid

[Electric Monk]

17. It's an unfortunate coincidence that the acronym for it is a synonym for swamp and morass.

[MineralMan]

20. I doubt anyone considered that when the group was named.

An accidental acronym isn't all that interesting to me, though.

[defacto7]

25. If you think about it, there really aren't

any acronyms for his name or combinations of group designations with his name that don't make a synonym for something uncomfortable. Maybe using "Safe Haven" in the acronym like BSH, BOSH, OSH... Nothing really seems to work well.

[Cali_Democrat]

26. What's funny

is that people have accused me of being a "BOGer"

I don't even think I've posted there before.

This place is like high school sometimes.

[JI7]

28. i noticed most people attacked as being from that Group don't even post there

[MineralMan]

29. It has been a while, but I've been called that, too.

I may have posted once or twice there by responding to something in the Latest Threads list, but I can't remember the last time I might have done that.

Personally, I much prefer places like GD, where discussion can go anywhere. I'm not much for just talking to people who agree with me already. I'm a strong supporter of President Obama, but I can make that clear in GD just fine.

[pipi_k]

95. One of the reasons

why I tend to stay away from the more controversy-prone groups (except GD).

I keep my opinion to myself on many issues, so nobody can accuse me of being a "hater" or "supporter".

The most anybody can generally accuse me of is liking one brand of yarn over another, or one football team over another.

But, yeah, like you said...GD discussion can go anywhere (like free association...fun, IMO), and it's unlikely one can get banned here for having a different opinion (unless it's expressed rudely too many times).

Disagreement isn't always a bad thing, as many people think it is.

It can be mentally stimulating. And informative, if people just keep their minds open.

I've learned more from people I disagree with than from people who already think the way I do.

[MineralMan]

98. For me, there's plenty to discuss in GD.

As you say, disagreements are fine, and there's a lot to learn from people who have a different opinion. But, disagreements needn't involve name-calling, personal insults, or anger. I won't participate in any of that sort of thing, so I often pass over threads where a shouting match is going on.

I agree in many areas with people who tend to post in the Barack Obama Group. I don't post there or even visit that group often, since all I'd be doing is agreeing, most of the time. I also don't bother with DU groups where most of the discussion is something I don't care about or disagree with. I can't see the point.

So, GD is my DU home. I browse by using the GD post list, read and comment in threads that interest me, and avoid ones that don't or that are not actually discussing anything. I post an original post on an average of once a day, and reply in many threads. That's what I do on DU. Others use DU in other ways, and that's fine with me.

I do dislike personal attacks in discussion forums, so I alert on really bad ones. I almost never, though, alert if the attack is on me. I'd rather leave the post and let someone else alert if they think that's appropriate. I respond to DU jury requests, and vote as though I had never seen that poster's screen name before. I vote to leave much more often than to hide posts, but I look at the individual post and its context before making a decision.

I'd like DU to be a lively, civil place for discussion. Most of the time, it is. Sometimes it isn't.

[Iggo]

30. Straight answer to an unnecessary question.

Yay!

[ZombieHorde]

31. I sometimes read the BOG,

but I don't usually post there because I am pretty critical of most politicians, including President Obama. I have absolutely no problems with the BOG or the people who love to post there.

[JI7]

33. people still shocked that there are Democrats who came to a Democratic site

and like the Democratic President.

[MineralMan]

34. There's a lot of variety of political beliefs on DU.

I came here because of the name of the website. As a lifelong Democrat, it seemed like a good place to be.

The Democratic Party contains a broad spectrum of people in its membership, but all are Democrats if they vote for Democrats. That seems simple enough. I don't ever mind disagreement over issues.

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. I know right?

incredible

[Heddi]

35. honest question...do you think your constant Preachy approach to DU'ers is productive?

Because when you're not being really offensive to GBLT'ers on the day that DOMA & Proposition 8 was declared unconstitutional and equating gay marriage with someone marrying a tomato plant (and thinking it was really funny and biting satire!), you seem to just preach. Preach preach preach.

I think you're going for the "wise old man who wants to impart his knowledge to the dumber, younger generation" but you come off as a preachy, condescending know it all (who doesn't know it all) and I wonder if you find this method to be a productive means of getting whatever point you're making (even a point that same-sex marriage is the same as human-tomato plant marriage!)

[MineralMan]

37. Thank you for taking the time to reply.

I found your reply very interesting.

[Sheldon Cooper]

68. Thanks.

I was afraid that I was the only one who saw this routine for what it really is.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

74. .

.

[pipi_k]

96. Honest question...

If someone keeps pissing people off by doing what they keep insisting he's doing, why don't they just ignore him?

I was going to say, just put that person on one's ignore list, but people always have some excuse or another for not doing what would likely keep them from being so annoyed.

So let's just say, how come people who don't want to see XYZ's constant "preaching" don't pass right by his posts?

Wouldn't that make more sense than continuing to read stuff that pisses them off? There are a few DUers who are not on my ignore list that I pass right by because I know I'll just be annoyed.

I dunno...maybe I'm being unreasonable.

[ScreamingMeemie]

36. Comments on Discussion Groups work better in the Welcome Forum.

Surprised you wouldn't know that.

[MineralMan]

38. Thanks for your comment. I chose to post this in GD, though.

I hope that's OK.

If not, and you think it's inappropriate for GD, you can alert on it for not being in keeping with the GD Statement of Purpose.

[ScreamingMeemie]

39. Nope. It's not. Sorry.

But, I'm not the boss of things.

[MineralMan]

41. Please see my edited post, above.

Thanks.

[ScreamingMeemie]

42. No thanks.

Have a nice day, MineralMan.

[MineralMan]

43. Thank you.

I'm having an excellent day. I just finished up a contract, and am taking a few hours off before moving on to the next one. I haven't had much time for DU lately.

[madrchsod]

47. well there`s always the lounge.........

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1018

[MineralMan]

48. Thanks. I rarely visit that forum.

I don't understand it very well. When I go there, I end up being confused.

[theHandpuppet]

50. Yes, and some folks have GD confused with the Lounge

Not that it's ever enforced, unfortunately.

[grantcart]

51. Not sure what prompted either the question or this thread.

But since we are going to put the BOG back into microscopic examination let me clear up a few myths:

1) While it is for supporters of the President people who post there are not in unanimous support of everything the President does. I am also a member of the Elizabeth Warren Group, I just don't see the need to build fences and become mutually exclusive about who we like as leaders, even if they have different areas of strengths.

2) You can make thoughtful comments in the BOG that are questioning or show opposition to a particular policy of the President but you must do so in a respectful way. Question an appointment, fine. Question his motive, character, or dedication to the Democratic Party and you will get a block.

3) We take no pleasure in blocking people from the BOG. We welcome people to come by. We have gone months without any blocking and then there will be a scrum somewhere and we get a horde of folks who make a statement get banned and then go back to other forums and relate proudly that they have been banned by the evil bastards at the BOG.

4) Sometimes people post in the BOG and are unaware that they are in a protected group and get banned. Anyone who DUmails me and states that was the case is automatically unblocked regardless of what was said because we are not trying to trap folks into getting blocked.

5) I am not from the first generation of folks but came in 2008. It is my personal opinion that if you only participate in GD or the other bare knuckled forums then the DU experience is a very nihilistic dark one. Everyone should find some other more intimate group that they can interact and make friendships without thinking that everything they say is going to be litigated. For some its the lounge, others its baking. For many of us its the BOG. We feel comfortable there. For me it reignites the same affection for a leader that I had for Robert Kennedy. RFK was a flawed individual. But he, like the President had the ability to take you out of your present point of view and see new possibilities. If the President doesn't do that for you I understand.

6) Members of the BOG are not intolerant. I would make the case that they are the most tolerant folks at DU. They do not want get rid of anyone (except trolls) at DU. We would prefer to engage folks who share a different perspective. We are happy that we are in a community that are passionate about privacy rights, foreign military intervention, equality and all of the other foci of DU. In some cases some of us will agree or disagree, but we like the diversity of DU, and we are not going anywhere. There are some here that would like us removed. That's OK we will irritate them with our persistent cheerful optimism. More frustrating for us is the constant mischaracterization of who we are and what we are about.

DU is a strong community when we disagree and discuss but refrain from questioning motives and worth.

There is faux dispute about which Democrats were responsible for 2010.

The answer is Democrats are hard working regular people who have full active lives and put in long days at work. We always suffer in off year elections. The only reason that we don't own the House is because we have lower off year turn outs and turn gerrymandering power to the Republicans. Arizona is owned by the Republicans at the state level. Its constitution effectively forbids gerrymandering. AZ has 6 Democrats and 5 Republicans in the House.

If you want the President to sign more liberal legislation then we need to have a more liberal Congress.

Everyone at DU should be united in achieving that in 2014. Those that are obsessed with dividing DU into groups and well defined "ways and pitting them against each other are simply doing what the Republicans want. It is the only way we can lose.

[Wait Wut]

52. I don't know what to say.

You said it all.

This is my favorite part:

If you want the President to sign more liberal legislation then we need to have a more liberal Congress.

Everyone at DU should be united in achieving that in 2014. Those that are obsessed with dividing DU into groups and well defined "ways and pitting them against each other are simply doing what the Republicans want. It is the only way we can lose.

[Andy823]

58. Couldn't have said it better!

"If you want the President to sign more liberal legislation then we need to have a more liberal Congress.

Everyone at DU should be united in achieving that in 2014. Those that are obsessed with dividing DU into groups and well defined "ways and pitting them against each other are simply doing what the Republicans want. It is the only way we can lose."

People may disagree on things, complain, etc., but the goal should be as you stated, to make sure we get a more liberal Congress in 2014. And those who want to divide constantly, should be ignored.

[Ptah]

60. Your answer to this OP is top notch.

And thanks for the mention of the AZ congressional delegation.

[DevonRex]

61. I would only add...

that we read and post in GD so we're well aware of other DUer' views. So if a poster wanders in who has recently called one of the hosts a "groupie bloodthirsty Al Qaeda supporting warmonger" in GD, for example, that poster might get blocked. And not just because s/he was mean to a host but because a poster who thinks the president hires, funds, trains and arms Al Qaeda obviously doesn't support President Obama, and in our opinion believes CTs. And because calling members of the Obama Group "groupies" whose Obama/Biden posters are "all sticky." Note to jury, I'm quoting a hidden post to make the point of the horrible things said about Obama Group members in GD. As if we could forget who said such things when they show up in our group.

[grantcart]

62. well to be fair we don't do it out of malice but we don't want to be charged with

"accessory to embarrassment."

[MirrorAshes]

64. Very well said. n/t

[JoePhilly]

65. Nicely done, as usual.

[Kaleva]

66. Good post!

[joshcryer]

86. Divide and conquer is their way.

I know you are being gentle with how you're coming across here, but many will not appreciate your thoughtful, laborious post on this issue. They don't actually care.

[grantcart]

92. They are never the ones that I am speaking too.

Its the DUer "in the middle" that is my target, and they get it.

[Cha]

91. Hi grant.. I've seen references to what the original question

to Skinner was about.. and, I'm glad MM brought it into GD. Skinner's reply was especially heartening.

[philly_bob]

99. Please see #97.

I was banned for a comment that was intended to lead to a more liberal Congress in 2014.

[philly_bob]

100. Note: I have been unblocked from BOG by grantcart.

Thanks.

[gejohnston]

63. true diversity is people who differ in their experiences and outlooks

as their appearance and sub cultures joining together.

[philly_bob]

73. Check out number of DU'ers banned from BOG

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1102

I'm one of them.

Which is okay, but their Group banning standards are considerably different than DU's general banning standards. Putting BOG entries in the Greatest Threads invites newbies to comment. Newbies banned under BOG's ultra-strict TOS get a bad taste of DU.

[JoePhilly]

75. See post #51.

[Ohio Joe]

77. Well... To be fair...

1ProudAtheist, ThirdWayCowplop, Ocelot, Vector Tangent, HumansAndResources, MrSlayer, Civilization2, EyesWideShut, MotherPetrie, star_anise, TheMadMonk, anotherone, CranialRectaLoopback, UnrepentantLiberal, hypergrove, and RevStPatrick from the BOG block list have all been given a pizza from DU as well. As to how many are banned from DU... I strongly suggest you sign up for MIRT, I am just finishing my first term (another week or two I think) and it is pretty shocking to see just how many do in fact get banned.

[joshcryer]

87. When I saw that list I immediately knew the punchline.

So many disruptor's. The Obama haters are legion.

[philly_bob]

97. I'm on the list. I'm an Obama-Hater now?

I was banned because I posted one sentence: "Do you think striking Syria will help in 2014 elections?" That's disruptive? I think that's a damn good question.

Also, I didn't know I was in the BOG group rather than general discussion. I told that to the moderator, but she banned me anyway, contrary to grantcart's assertion in #51:

"4) Sometimes people post in the BOG and are unaware that they are in a protected group and get banned. Anyone who DUmails me and states that was the case is automatically unblocked regardless of what was said because we are not trying to trap folks into getting blocked."

To be fair, there might have been a case of mistaken identity. I think moderator thought I was someone else, with a history of BOG offenses. I told her so, but was banned anyway. THAT is misuse of moderator authority. If DU gives you moderator power, you have a responsibility to use that power with care and double-check your decisions when challenged.

[grantcart]

101. Off the list as are the others who let us know that they posted unintentionally.

I don't remember getting a DU from you but I get a lot so I could have overlooked it.


It may have been mistaken identity or it may have been an overly quick response from a host.


As was posted up thread a lot of trolls come by the BOG and try to get banned to help their 'street cred' or just stir the s#$% and if you posted at one of those times then they may have over reacted.


Thanks for letting us know.

[Cha]

89. Wow, I did not know that. thanks Ohio Joe

[Blue_In_AK]

80. No one has ever been banned from the photo group

Just sayin'...

[Fumesucker]

82. Slackers..

[JHB]

83. What I find remarkable is the query that Skinner was responding to n/t

[Cha]

90. Thank you, MineralMan..

Sweet! The "Barack Obama Group", affectionately known as the BOG is here to stay "as long as there are supporters on DU". Thank you, Skinner!

[MineralMan]

93. No problem. I know that most DUers never go to ATA,

and wanted to post this so they could see that Skinner supports the Barack Obama Group's continuation on DU. It's not a group I post in, but it is a group that many do post in and that some others dislike a great deal.