Has Anyone Noticed The Number Of Longtime/Newtime DUer's Leaving DU ???

[WillyT]

Good work trolls...

You've truly ruined this place.

[chillfactor]

1. agreed....

seems the trolls have taken over the jury system

[demosincebirth]

8. Its not trolls that have ruined DU. Many have forgotten what "Democratic" Underground was meant

to be, initially.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

50. like...seeking truth and not blindly cheerleading?

The DINOs are a bigger problem.

[treestar]

75. False choice

What is "seeking truth?" The truth is we have to make alliances with other people to get anywhere in politics.

[sabrina 1]

137. Seeking the truth means exactly what it says. FACING it appears to be very disturbing

to some people. The truth can never hurt a nation, can it? Hiding it CAN.

[840high]

152. ...^ that

[1StrongBlackMan]

153. All of which was not the intent of DU. n/t

[sabrina 1]

155. The truth was not the intent of DU? Then a lot of us have been seriously misled.

Airc, the Truth about the lies that led us to war, was a big reason why people came to DU, the truth about the abuses of our Civil Liberties as a big reason also why people came to DU. It wasn't easy to find on the MSM or anywhere else.

When did DU decide that the truth is not important or the 'intent' of this forum?

[treestar]

182. I would have to say, what you think is "truth" is something others will not see that way

Your opinion is not a "truth."

But it is true that we have to work with other people and can't expect clones of ourselves as to 100% agreement.

[CreekDog]

220. what does the Terms of Service say is the purpose of DU?

or does that not apply anymore?

[sabrina 1]

221. The TOS says we must not tell the truth? Where?

[CreekDog]

223. Tell us what the Terms of Service says

you can even copy and paste it.

now does it say what you say it does, or does it say something else?

if you're going to misrepresent the Terms of Service, that's pretty easy to judge.

[sabrina 1]

225. I know what the TOS says and have never seen what you are claiming it says. So please post a link to

where the TOS says 'we must not seek the truth'.

Thanks.

[CreekDog]

242. If you know what the TOS says, then why did you substitute what it says the purpose of DU is

for your own definition?

[sabrina 1]

295. If you know what the TOS says, why are you claiming it says 'DU is not about the truth'? Where does

it say that? Either post a link to your claim, or admit you are making stuff up.

[seabeyond]

371. MY truth, sarina. i see the battle in the supreme court. dont fix that arm, all YOUR truth matters

not.

our truths are not the same. do not suggest you are the ONLY one with truth. people will call you on it. as they should.

[sabrina 1]

373. 'Du is not about the truth. It is about electing Democrats'. That sounds like something I have

read on FR. Do you agree that electing Democrats has nothing to do with the truth? Which also means it has nothing to do with honesty, integrity, honor etc. THAT is what Freepers say about DU.

And YOUR truth is not everyone's truth. And if you suggest you are the only who represents the truth, people will call you on it.

So, now that we are told that electing Democrats has nothing to do with the truth, are we going to see that in campaign speeches?

I'm picturing it. Dem candidate for the White House:

'Please vote for me, don't worry, electing me and my fellow Democrats has nothing to do with the truth'

What a shame that you think that. I am a Democrat because I trust Democrats to be honest and truthful. I KNOW electing Republicans has nothing to do with the truth.

All this is going to be news to voters.

[seabeyond]

374. you created a bogus argument and that was my point. the very premise of what you argue,

is not a discussion, but yours.

i am well aware My truth is not everyones as i stated it in the post you replied to.

[sabrina 1]

382. I created nothing. I RESPONDED to a comment in this thread that said 'the truth is not the intent of

DU, electing Democrats is'.

If you can explain what that means, then please do.

[seabeyond]

383. personally i think the poster should have called out your version of truth,

hence me posting to you, and not what he said.

[sabrina 1]

385. What was 'my version' of the truth that you should have 'called out'? Can you link to it?

[seabeyond]

386. i stopped going in circles with you, long ago.

[sabrina 1]

388. I believe you are the one who addressed me, stated that you should have called out

'my version of the truth'.

I have no idea what that means, so I asked you, since I'm pretty certain I posted nothing that could be interpreted as 'my version of the truth', to link to it.

If you can't then my question is answered. You called ME out, as you call it, personally, not addressing any issue, for your own personal reasons.

Now you are unable or unwilling to link to your claim, and you are blaming ME for the circles YOU created.

Either post a link to what you claim, or the TRUTH is, there was no 'my version of the truth' that you needed to call out.

[Number23]

410. You and 2/3 of this board, sea.

[sabrina 1]

416. Only 2/3rds? I thought it was EVERYONE on DU?

What happened to the other 1/3rd? They changed their minds?

I love this place, it's better than the comedy channel sometimes!

[seabeyond]

375. the point is, you feel addressing your issues is a truth, where as i see it as causing problems

addressing my issue. the supreme court. so i will argue with you, when we differ. it does not mean i oppose truth, it means, i oppose what to you is the primary issues.

[sabrina 1]

378. What are my primary issues? I believe in talking about ISSUES rather than other DUers, that is

one of my 'primary issues'. Not particularly interested in all the personal attacks here. I WILL correct any attempt to lie about my position on issues, other than that I am a Democrat because their Party Platform represents the issues I care about.

Now if that platform isn't about 'truth' which is what we are being told here, then a whole lot of Democrats are going to be pretty shocked to hear that.

The truth matters to me. In the SC and elsewhere.

So it is quite a shock to learn here that, as has been said right in this thread 'Electing Democrats is what DU is about which has nothing to do with truth'.

If you want to fight, find someone else. I want to know if my Party has changed its platform to where only 'winning' matters and issues are of little or no importance. And I want to know, and maybe Skinner can weigh in on this, if DU's 'intent' is not about truth, as was said right in this thread, 'it is about electing Democrats'. That says that the two do not go together and that is news to me.

[seabeyond]

381. none of that really has anything to do with anything sabrina. but you can keep holding up a banner

it is about truth and lie.

i do not buy it. as i have stated.

[sabrina 1]

395. I have no idea what it is you 'don't buy'. I have asked you link to what it is you chose to

attack me personally over, your claim that I stated 'that only MY truth matters' . That is hogwash especially since the posts are all right here in this thread for everyone to see.

Since you have not linked to this 'my truth matters' post, which I was certain you could not, I assume you simply wanted to personally attack ME for some reason.

[Jakes Progress]

162. You mean that truth was not your intent on DU?

What was?

[1StrongBlackMan]

282. My intent for DU was/is to discuss politics/political issues ...

to learn about political topics and experience different points of views on the ... all with a group of Democrats(and later, progressives) committed to electing more Democrats, and fewer republicans, to office.

The former points were purely personal; whereas, the latter point is the stated purpose of DU.

[Jakes Progress]

319. So truth is personal?

Sorry I don't get it. What "former points"? What "latter" points?

I responded to your post that responded to # 137 which was about seeking the truth, which you said "was not the purpose of DU".

What points are you referring to? How should we discuss issues if not with the truth?

[merrily]

331. I'm committed to electing more Democrats and fewer Republicans to office.

That is why I vote in every primary and general no matter how local or small, and why I vote Democratic. And why I urge others to do the same.

Also one of many reasons why I don't want Hillary to be the nominee: I think she'll lose for sure. I thought so in 2008, which was the main reason I initially decided to donate to Obama, starting in November 2007, though after making that choice, I became an avid supporter.

Very few here are not committed to electing more Democrats and fewer Republicans. However, you and some others have a very specific idea of what that should look like that I and some others do not share with you. And, apparently, Skinner does not share with you that idea of what DU should look like, or people like me would have been banned long ago.

[1StrongBlackMan]

342. I agree ...

Very few here are not committed to electing more Democrats and fewer Republicans. However, you and some others have a very specific idea of what that should look like that I and some others do not share with you.

And I do not have a single problem with that; but it seems that some feel entitled to claim/dictate their vision is more valid/true than others. This is what I, and others, object to.

[merrily]

343. No, you and others have objected to a number of things. At least in the posts I've seen.

I don't know how you ascertain what a poster seems to feel entitled to. However, I (or people with views like mine) have been called a Republican, a troll, a hater and any number of things. And accusing of posting to depress the vote. And now, there are claims that I am inconsistent with Skinner's vision of DU.

If things like that don't add up to DU's right claiming their vision is more valid/true than mine, I am not sure what would.

[sabrina 1]

384. That is why most Democrats and Progressives are here. To discuss and learn.

And I have learned from some great people who were the reason I initially signed up.

So, let me ask you, did you want to learn the facts/truth about political topics?

Eg, is it true that SS has saved thousands of lives over the course of several decades?

Is it true that if SS were to be privatized, it would be a much better program?

Is it true that Bush/Cheney et al LIED us into a devastating war?

Republicans have 'their truth' about the Iraq war lies and we have ours. Is there any dispute here or even with them anymore, that we WERE lied into a war?

Truth does matter. If, eg, we accept THEIR truth, this country will be at war forever, lies to get us into war won't matter.

[1StrongBlackMan]

387. I don't care about the gop's truth ...

most Democrats and progressives share a truth on political issues, though we may differ on the tactics of how to attain that goal. So, I don't feel a need to discuss "truth" on this message board.

[sabrina 1]

389. Well, we ALL cared about their version of the truth re the Iraq War. Had we not,

THEIR lies would have gone unchallenged. Those challenges are making it far more difficult or them now to start a war in Iran and in Russia. So I do care about exposing lies and telling the truth..

And so did this forum as a whole.

So you are really just speaking for yourself then when you say 'truth was not the intent of this forum, electing Democrats is'.

I assumed the two went together. You are saying the truth doesn't matter. I think it matters a great deal. And I have seen nothing anywhere to say that this forum was not about truth, integrity, honesty.

Because if it had ever said that, I doubt it would still be here.

[1StrongBlackMan]

398. Sighhh ...

What I said was:

I don't care about the gop's truth ... most Democrats and progressives share a truth on political issues, though we may differ on the tactics of how to attain that goal. So, I don't feel a need to discuss "truth" on this message board.

So you are really just speaking for yourself then when you say 'truth was not the intent of this forum, electing Democrats is'.

No ... I am reciting what the site's developers said, when I said "the intent of DU is to elect Democrats. The immediately following excerpt should end this particular "debate":

From the ToS (written by the site owners):

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office.

Now I will grant, nowhere in the ToS does it NOT say that this forum was not about truth, integrity, honesty ... but then again, it also doesn't say that the site is not about moon-worship, celery and/or coffee mugs.

So I'll say it again (a little differently) ... I don't care about the gop's truth ... I accept that most Democrats and progressives share a common truth on political issues ... and a part of truth is the republicans have proven more damaging to the US and the world than Democrats. And that truth, translates to me, as ... though we (Democrats and progressives) may differ on the tactics of how to attain political goals, our efforts are fractured when we focus on debating/discussing "truth" {ETA: and/or the flaws this potential candidate or that potential candidate (as opposed to, the STRENGTH of "my" preferred candidate)} amongst ourselves; rather than, working to elect more Democrats and fewer republicans.

[sabrina 1]

399. Well, we are arguing over two different things then. The topic was DU rather than the GOP

as far as I was concerned. I responded to your statement, which I may have misinterpreted, that 'the truth was not the intent of DU'.

I agree with most of what you said in this comment and apologize for any misunderstanding, but that is why I asked, to try to understand your pov.

Some things go without saying because they are so self evident, imo. Such as, 'electing Dems and truth/facts' are the same thing. Otherwise we would be Republicans.

Anyhow, thanks for clearing up what you meant. This medium often makes it difficult to say what we mean so that everyone understands.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

323. Well, behaving as poorly as Republicans when they're in office is a pathetic commentary...

and regrettable byproduct.

[merrily]

329. What was the intent of DU? And exactly how is it being violated?

And why on earth would Skinner not ban all the people who, according to you, are violating his vision of DU?

[hifiguy]

198. Home run, sabrina!

[daleanime]

205. A simple truth.....

now how many will 'misread' that.

If we can't even face reality, how can we deal with it?

[one_voice]

214. One man's truth is another man's lie. nt

[sabrina 1]

215. Could you clarify that please? How eg, is it relevant to this conversation?

[NanceGreggs]

276. What is "eg"? n/t

[Jakes Progress]

320. E.g. stands for exempli gratia,

which means “for example.”

[NanceGreggs]

322. Yes, I know what "e.g." means ...

... and its proper usage. I was the one who explained it to sabrina several months ago, because she was completely unfamiliar with it.

I was just curious as to how she would respond to my query about the word "eg" - but that's a moot point now.

[sabrina 1]

376. Your query was ignored because the purpose of it was clear. And no, you did not 'explain' it to me.

Eg, (note I left out the periods)and if that is a problem for you, then don't read my posts because I always leave them out.

Would you like me to explain the new technology to you and how it has its own language?

Btw, I took Latin in school. So it was my teacher who explained 'eg' to me.

Didn't you recently write something about how we are Dems and that personal attacks or something, were just awful? Or was that someone else?

[NanceGreggs]

419. I thought you would get a chuckle ...

... out of my query - but apparently not.

We had quite heated argument about it last summer, in a thread about Snowden's emails. You insisted that the NSA had stated that they had never received a single email from him, and I pointed out that they'd said they didn't have any emails from him wherein he stated his "concerns" about the NSA, not any emails per se.

I then listed some possible emails he might send in the normal course, e.g. queries about his benefits, or confirmation of a meeting time, a note that he would be leaving early due to a doctor's appointment, etc.

You berated me for stating that I "knew" about such emails and their subject matter, and wanted to know how I knew.

It was then that I explained to you that my use of e.g. meant I was offering examples of the type of emails he could have sent, and that that was what "e.g" meant.

I thought you'd get a laugh out of being reminded of that exchange, as you now use "e.g" or "eg" regularly - but apparently not.

[Jakes Progress]

412. From your post,

it did not appear that you did.

The use was very clear in the post you questioned. You could have disagreed and then written a reply to the post telling why you didn't think so, but you chose the more ambiguous and less thoughtful reply. Hence, my "help".

[NanceGreggs]

417. It was, ...

... or was meant to be, a private joke between sabrina and I - the fact that I would ask her what it meant.

[sabrina 1]

421. I just read your other post and did not remember that conversation or most likely

I would have laughed. Anyhow, it appears I misunderstood your intention so my apologies. I think I've always used eg, or ie where it is appropriate afairc though.

[NanceGreggs]

422. Well, you didn't at the time ...

... of our exchange over the use of "e.g." - but I'm happy you got a laugh out of it now.

[Jakes Progress]

437. Private?

Do you need help understanding how a forum works as opposed to private messaging?

Please.

[NanceGreggs]

438. I said it was a "private" joke between sabrina and I ...

... not a private message.

I thought she'd get a laugh out of being reminded of it - and when she remembered the context, she did.

[Jakes Progress]

439. Again.

You understand the difference between private messages and public forum posts. Don't be all up in the air if people don't happen to "get" your private jokes. Instead, apologize for being interruptive of the discussion and promise that you will try to think about what you post and where next time.

[NanceGreggs]

440. After a nudge, sabrina "got" the joke ...

... and laughed about it.

Why this is a problem for you is truly beyond me.

[Jakes Progress]

441. Why you think you are special

enough to not have to be clear to an audience is beyond me.

Why do you think you don't need to be clear when you write and then jump up on your special horse to berate those who read what you write and think it means what you say?

Let's try one more time. If you write a personal, inside joke to someone with a reference that no one else is supposed to understand in a personal message, that is cool. When you write it in a public thread where discussions take place based on the words written, it is highly egotistical or the epitome of unaware.

Please tell us that you understand. If you don't, then you need someone with more patience than me to explain it to you. (Or not. Maybe you don't care if your words don't mean anything.) If you do understand, then stop pretending that your faux pas is everyone else's fault.

[NanceGreggs]

445. Again ...

Why you think this has anything to do with anything of substance is beyond me.

I don't know what you mean by my "faux pas". I was chiding Sabrina for using the term "e.g" (or "eg&quot , because she berated me soundly for using it a while back, claiming that I was posting "facts" that I couldn't prove. That's when I explained to her what "e.g." meant, and that what I had posted were meant as examples of what may have occurred, and not facts in evidence.

Perhaps you should contact the Admins and ask them to institute a new DU rule whereby no one is permitted to post anything on a thread that will not immediately be understood by everyone. No doubt they will get right on that.

If nothing else, I think we can both agree that Sabrina is more than capable of speaking for herself. Why YOU feel a need to keep harping on this is anyone's guess.

[Jakes Progress]

446. Again

You keep saying the same stuff over and over. It still only proves you don't understand how communication works.

(I suspect that you do understand, but find it impossible to admit doing something dumb. An excessive pride and overweening desire to be seen as beyond error is something that should be self-examinined. I can admit my dumb move in trying to actually exchange honest thought with you. It is an error that I notice many others avoid. My mailbox indicates that I should know that trying such an exchange based on honest thought is a silly thing to do. I will heed the advice provided to me. You may "get in" a last one and smugly stride off the pointless field - error unacknowledged, apology unoffered, self-congratulated victor. )

[sabrina 1]

377. Just so you know, of course I knew the meaning. And no, the poster to whom you responded did not

'explain' anything to me. I took Latin as a subject in school. The query was ignored by me because I knew the intent. I don't understand why people search for something to try to undermine other DUers with rather than use this forum for what it was intended, respectful discussion. So sometimes I ignore such comments. Eg, the one to which you responded.

[Jakes Progress]

411. Just you you know . . . I knew.

[sabrina 1]

413. I thought you probably did, it was after all, pretty transparent.

[merrily]

332. When it comes to the truth of why DU was founded, Skinner the only man who truth matters here.

If people don't get banned, it's probably because they are not violating Skinner's truth of what DU is for.

[CreekDog]

243. What you're attempting to do is suggest that everyone who disagrees with you

is opposing "seeking the truth".

when they are merely, correctly, pointing out that the Terms of Service, the mission statement of DU says something else. it doesn't contradict the search for truth, but that is beside the point.

[sabrina 1]

300. Where does the TOS say DU is not about the truth? What you are doing is agreeing with the

comment that 'seeking the truth' is not what DU is about. Is DU 'not about the truth'? I am giving you a chance to explain why you are supporting that comment.

[merrily]

333. BOOM. Hiding it, denying, altering it, seeking to exclude all views but one, etc.

[Pooka Fey]

415. +1

[merrily]

328. Straw man. (As long as we're naming logical fallacies, that's a straw man.)

I have not seen a single post that says we should not make alliances or that we should not compromise.

We should also avoid bad hygiene, but I haven't seen any points pushing bad hygiene, either.

[treestar]

335. They certainly imply they can't work with others

Who disagree with them on any one thing.

They are going to "stick to their principles" and they won't support a Democrat that does not agree with them on anything.

It is not a straw man. They claim a party has to "earn their vote" which means that they will withhold their vote and any participation if they don't like everything.

They aren't Democrats. They are would be dictators. Everyone else has to explain why they are not serving them in the way they please. Pretty big egos, really.

[merrily]

337. Only in your mind. That is my reply to every sentence in your post.

[treestar]

339. No, I've read on DU many posts

to that effect. I've read enough condemnation of other Democrats and plenty of posts saying they are going to stay home if Hillary is the nominee.

[merrily]

341. Staying home has nothing to do with alliances, which is where you started.

Besides, voting for Hillary is not the definition of "Democrat."

That said, I think not voting is like shooting your own self in the foot for no reason whatever.

[ProfessorGAC]

84. Sounds Like That Tool Who Was on CSPAN WJ Sunday Before Last

Talking about traditional marriage and just kept talking about the "american people knowing the TRUTH" about marriage.

You sound just like him. When exactly did you get your monopoly on truth?

[ProfessorGAC]

347. That's My Point

But, it clearly eluded you. And, i'm no third wayer. And, i didn't say i had any monopoly on truth. I asked a question of someone who acted like they did.

Extremist certitude is unattractive on either side.

[merrily]

340. The "people to my left are exactly like the people to my right" meme got older faster

than the stupid pony meme.

Know what's really most like the right? The center right and the far right.

Trying to associate homophobia with DU's left is about as lowdown a DU post as I have ever seen and I've way too many.

[ProfessorGAC]

346. Nice Try

Methinks you protest too much

[merrily]

348. Now, you're implying that I personally am a homophobe. And I didn't think you could go lower than

your prior post.

I've posted quite a lot on this board about matters relating to GLBT people. Find a post of mine that is homophobic and post a link.

Put up or shut up. You're not fooling anyone.

[1StrongBlackMan]

151. I don't recall either being what DU was intended to be ...

I could be wrong; but, I thought (I read) DU was intended as an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office.

[nolabear]

177. You'd think, wouldn't you? But working within (and changing) the system seems anathema

I live in Seattle, where just about every attempt to stage a meaningful protest and to work with the people who are in a position to make changes is corrupted by "Anarchists," who don't have a plan, don't have representatives who can get anything done, and to me just seem the left wing version of the right wing "destroy the government" types.

That's how DU strikes me an awful lot lately. Hence my relative scarcity.

[Number23]

190. That's because that's exactly what they are.

"Anarchists," who don't have a plan, don't have representatives who can get anything done, and to me just seem the left wing version of the right wing "destroy the government" types.

I said almost the same thing in my post right below yours. And I think the reason they have infiltrated DU so heavily is because this is probably one of the few mainstream web sites that would allow their idiocy. A few really obvious Putin worshipers, America haters and racists etc. get run off here but it takes practically half the board screaming about it for YEARS before it happens. And their friends and socks usually pick up the slack anyway.

This is probably one of only a handful of places IN THE WORLD that these folks have anything even resembling clout. And that's exactly why they are so loud and frantic here.

[NanceGreggs]

283. " ... it takes practically half the board screaming about it for YEARS before it happens."

I hate to disagree with you, Number23.

But you'll remember that oh-so-obvious RW troll "Better Believe It" was sent packing within days of his first posts.

:

Okay, so it was three and a half years after his first post.



And come to think of it, it was 18,500 posts later.



OK. Nevermind.

[still_one]

284. Yesterday I commented how important the SC would be regarding the next election, and I was amazed

On what I thought wasn't a particularly controversial issue, how they took exception that it was that important of an issue

Disagreeing with Democrats is legitimate, but the "demonization" of Democrats, is going too far

[Number23]

287. I agree completely.

Disagreeing with Democrats is legitimate, but the "demonization" of Democrats, is going too far

And after demonizing the current Democratic president every week of every month of every year he's been in office, they've already turned their attentions to Hillary Clinton with some of the most ludicrous criticsms they can find.

Talking about the importance of SC nominees should not be controversial here. The fact that it is shows how really divorced from reality this place is.

[sabrina 1]

301. Are you really saying that 'electing Democrats' has nothing to do with the truth?

I never noticed that in the TOS. 'Electing Democrats has nothing to do with the truth'. Where does it say that?

[1StrongBlackMan]

304. What is "truth"? Clearly, one person's "truth" differs from another's ...

but that does not/should not provide us from working to elect Democrats.

[sabrina 1]

308. 'What is the truth?' Give me an example of an issue that it would be okay for a politician to NOT

tell the truth about? Because I think you really are saying that there is no truth.

The Iraq War. Bush's truth was to lie about it. Was that okay?

[Vattel]

327. I agree with you, but some think it is intellectually sophisticated to deny the existence of truth.

Their view tends to get caught in its own echo because they want to say that it is an objective truth that there is no objective truth.

[treestar]

338. In politics there's no way to have an objective truth

It may be the truth that Bush lied about Iraq. But a lot of people believed it had WMD and that was a truth for them.

[Vattel]

405. No, they believed it was true, but it was false. They were mistaken.

[treestar]

408. They didn't know it at the time

Those who were sincere, in any event.

There may be some truth about the JFK assassination, too, but that which can't be proven is still just an opinion.

[tblue37]

443. FYI: Your autocorrect hijacked your post and turned "prevent" into "provide." nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

444. Yes. it did.

[treestar]

336. It also doesn't say in the TOS that Olive Garden is a terrible restaurant

It doesn't say you can't discuss eating apple pie.

It doesn't say you can't be a freeper troll pretending to be a dissatisfied lefty.

This is dumb.

The "truth" for you appears to be that the Democrats are not good enough for you. In which case, join a third party.

[Number23]

185. I agree. Trolls have not ruined this place, unless you're referring to posters that are rigid

and extremely "devoted" to certain ideals, back patting and labels and go out of their way to not only refuse to listen to others, but demand that everyone march in lockstep with them all while they wail about lockstepping. And their hypocricy and poorly informed opinions just make it almost unbearable.

Why would anyone want to march in lockstep with a group of folks that barely know what their talking about, have no knowledge of history, show no concern for their fellow human beings especially those us with melanin, a non-heterosexual orientation and/or ovaries, and derive seemingly ALL of their power from shitting all over established and ancient institutions because they don't have the means or the ability to start their own?

I mean, if I had to choose between these folks and a political party that's pretty lame but at least puts forth some effort even if it's just every 12 years, there'd be no fucking contest. And there isn't.

[betsuni]

212. I do think the locksteppers are a type of troll.

It's like joining a vegetarian group and posting angry barbecue pork rib recipes all the time.

[Number23]

285. The thing is, if these folks had their acts together, I have no doubt that everybody would be happy

to "lockstep" with them.

But it's as I said, they have no depth, no understanding and no interest in the varying thoughts, values and ideals that go with being a HUMAN BEING, let alone a Democrat. They are shallow charicatures demanding that human beings -- the most "inpure" species on this planet -- adhere to their equally shallow and ignorant demands for purity.

And then they wonder why so few people have even the slightest interest in joining forces with them or even inviting them to the table despite the integrity and benefit of the policies they may be advocating for.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

222. The safest place to be on a progressive board is to be as ideologically rigid as possible.,,,

Actually, the safest place to be on a progressive or conservative board is to be ideologically rigid as possible.

[demosincebirth]

306. You hit the nail on the head, give the man a cigar!

[Number23]

309. No man am I...

[MADem]

29. I think we'd get a better sense of what DU really thinks if it took six months and a 1000 posts,

whichever comes LAST, to qualify for jury service. The trolls would really have to work hard to fuck the place over. It's too easy now.

[treestar]

74. That's a good idea eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. The whole jury system needs a second look...

Last edited Wed Mar 4, 2015, 10:38 AM - Edit history (1)

Members are using it to settle scores. Could you imagine a real life jury where a juror votes to convict the defendant and says he has always disliked him or her?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

109. I certainly think if you're dumb enough to say something like that in your jury comment

you ought to be able to have your jury comment flagged so an admin could whop you upside the head. If they want to play that game, they should at least be subtle about it.

I've actually got most of the people I consider total jackasses on ignore, so I never get invited to be on the juries for their comments.

[pintobean]

116. I don't think ignoring someone keeps you off their juries

This is on DI, but it says it applies to DU, too.
http://www.discussionist.com/10253559#post2

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

118. Interesting.

Well, I don't think any of the people I put on ignore are necessarily stupid, so they might simply be careful about how they write so that they don't get juried a lot, no matter how annoying they are. Lots of passive-aggressive stuff never gets to juries because it's not technically against the rules.

(Edit: Darn, and I just realized I missed a perfect opportunity to tease you by pretending I didn't see your comment and making you think you were on my ignore list

[ND-Dem]

143. you can blackball 3 or so people from your juries, however.

[pintobean]

147. Everybody gets 5

Donors get 15.

And it's blacklist.

[ND-Dem]

291. I think both work fine:

verb: blackball..reject (someone, usually a candidate applying to become a member of a private club), typically by means of a secret ballot.

synonyms: reject, debar, bar, ban, vote against, blacklist, exclude, shut out

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=define+blackball

noun: blacklist; plural noun: blacklists
a list of people or products viewed with suspicion or disapproval.

verb

verb: blacklist
put (a person or product) on a blacklist.

synonyms: boycott, ostracize, blackball, spurn, avoid, embargo, steer clear of, ignore;

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=define:+blacklist

[1StrongBlackMan]

159. I've had a post hidden, where a juror wrote ...

he/she voted to hide because I make "DU suck" by always bringing up race ... And my post being juried that had nothing to do with race.

Frankly, if someone gave me the screen-name of alerted on poster, the screen-name of the person being responded to, and the screen-names of the jury members, and I am confident that I can predict (with better than 60% accuracy) the jury "Leave/Hide" jury result ... and I wouldn't even need to see the comment. And more, I suspect that if one of 3 or 4 names appear in the "alerted on" column and one of 3 or 4 appear in the "in response to" column, my confidence level would top 90%.

[sabrina 1]

176. I had one hidden for referring to Poroshenko of Ukraine as the 'Chocolate King', which is true. He

made his fortune from Chocolate. I guess the alerter took an opportunity to claim it was a 'racist' statement, and enough of the jurors were either ignorant of Poroshenko's Chocolate Fortune, or didn't care and decided it was an opportunity to 'get' someone they didn't agree with. I actually laughed when I saw how far people go to 'get' someone. Facts don't seem to matter.

However, I think most people try to judge the comment and do not use the system to 'get' people.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

204. I've heard that 'DU suck' line a number of times now.

I wonder if it's always the same one or two people using it, or if just achieved DU meme status.

[1StrongBlackMan]

236. The times I've seen it, it was from different screen-names ...

and was not always directed at me. I, also, saw it on one of my two visits to Discussionist (it mentioned me and Bravenak, by name).

[MADem]

310. I think it came from one of the admins....it's in the DU TOS.

One more thing: Don't push your luck.
The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

[merrily]

403. Not for nuttin', but we've had a number of discussions and you didn't bring up race in any of them.

And I don't think you make DU suck at all.

I disagree with you on some things, but that's not pertinent to the above.

[hfojvt]

128. that would be old-timers who don't like each other

rather than new trolls ruining the place.

Joseph Heller made a point about Socrates jury. Cannot remember the exact numbers, and will not look them up. But in the first vote like 20 said he was innocent, but then only 10 voted against the death penalty. Meaning some voted to put him to death - for a crime they did NOT think he committed.

Such are juries.

But in the sense that people being put on timeout are "disruptors". Well, one measure of a disruptor might be - how many enemies did they make? If it is enough to put you on timeout, then you are apparently doing something wrong, no?

[tblue37]

219. That would depend on who those enemies are, wouldn't it? nt

[hfojvt]

372. it might

but jury selection favors
1. people with stars
2. people without hidden posts
3. people with a long history
4. people with an active history

As such, it should be 7 people who have contributed a fair amount to DU over the years.

[Pooka Fey]

244. I've seen that happen in juries too.

[BlueJazz]

288. Yes. You nailed it. I've seen that happen a few times. Pretty damn disgusting.

[TBF]

144. That is a really awesome idea. nt

[tblue37]

216. + a brazillion!, nt

[one_voice]

226. That's a good idea. I also think a reason for you decision should be..

mandatory. Explain why you decided to leave/hide. It doesn't take that long. I try to always leave a reason. A few times I haven't; 1) obvious troll (banned immediately) 2) rushing.

[sabrina 1]

390. I agree with that ...

[AverageJoe90]

40. I can't blame you.

I'd been the victim of bogus alerts, etc., myself, i.e. was once accused on shitting on all the Afro-American DUers, just because I'd taken an issue with one of our resident SJWs over something(never mind that not a few of those DUers are actually "white" folks, and I actually get along fairly well with most of the black folks that I've interacted with in general), and stupid shit like that.

[NaturalHigh]

61. I think some posters are on watch lists or something.

Some people get an alert (and maybe a hide) for a post that wouldn't raise an eyebrow if it came from someone else.

[AverageJoe90]

174. You might be right on that, possibly.

Might explain not just the problems I've had, but with quite a few others folks as well.

[Andy823]

267. Exactly.

Been there also, and yet some here can get away with saying anything they want and never get a hide.

[BlueJazz]

289. Yep. That's why when I get called for jury duty, the person only has to worry about the ...

...other 6. I very seldom vote to hide. (I think (?) like 1 percent.

[cyberswede]

95. good lord.

You are not a victim.

You are utterly tone deaf when it comes to race issues.

Weird that you put quotes around "white" - do you think they're not white? Do you think they're lying?

[AverageJoe90]

169. Just telling it like it really was. You know, since that was the *topic* of this OP.

Weird that you put quotes around "white" - do you think they're not white? Do you think they're lying?

If you're that concerned, the truth is, no.....although I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion(besides I don't put it in quotes all the time, either).

[cyberswede]

175. You unwillingness to understand is epic.

You said:

I'd been the victim of bogus alerts, etc., myself, i.e. was once accused on shitting on all the Afro-American DUers, just because I'd taken an issue with one of our resident SJWs over something(never mind that not a few of those DUers are actually "white" folks, and I actually get along fairly well with most of the black folks that I've interacted with in general), and stupid shit like that.

Your use of quotes around white implies that you're using the term sarcastically, or that the people you're referring to only claim to be white. There's no grammatical use for the quotes, so I that's how I came to the conclusion that you actually meant something else when you used "white."

In addition, using SWJ as a pejorative is offensive - and in your case, racist - since you felt the need to point out that some of "those DUers" are *gasp* "'white'" - as if only non-white people are interested in social justice.

Let me say it again: you are not a victim.

[AverageJoe90]

186. Wow.

Your use of quotes around white implies that you're using the term sarcastically, or that the people you're referring to only claim to be white.

Well, I guess I'm not one to take much stock in the term myself; hell, if it makes you feel better, I've also used quotes around the word when referring to myself as well.

There's no grammatical use for the quotes,

Maybe not, but why does that matter so much? Most of us aren't English majors, ya know.

In addition, using SWJ as a pejorative is offensive - and in your case, racist - since you felt the need to point out that some of "those DUers" are *gasp* "'white'" - as if only non-white people are interested in social justice.

Also untrue and inaccurate. I hate to say it, but it seems your personal disagreements and past grievances are clouding your judgment here; I can understand that, as that happens to many, even myself from time to time, but even so, I really do wish some would think things through a little more before actually pushing the reply button.

[cyberswede]

196. LOL. nt

[AverageJoe90]

197. Don't see what's so funny.....nt

[cyberswede]

199. I don't suppose you do.

[AverageJoe90]

200. So.....

Putting "white" in quotes is now apparently a bad thing, even if referring to oneself?

[cyberswede]

203. Huh?

I don't care how you refer to yourself. Punctuation has meaning, though.

[Number23]

180. And don't forget the use of "SJW" - social justice warrior

A phrase that conservatives and jerks of all persuasions use to demean and dismiss civil rights issues.

[cyberswede]

183. Yep. Amazing, isn't it?

But he's a VICTIM!!1

[betsuni]

192. I wondered what the hell SJW was.

I'm not fluent in right-wing vernacular, to be honest.

[Number23]

193. That's really not a bad thing. But it does say something about people who are "fluent" in it

and seem to be extremely proud of that.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=social+justice+warrior&defid=7914107

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

227. Some things never change, or I should say people. Keep up the good fight, cuz lord

knows aint nobody else gonna do it

[Number23]

293. With as many times out as he's had and as many people on his ass

You'd have thought some personal growth was in order.

But you're right. Doesn't appear to be in the cards with that one.

[tblue37]

224. Using "SJW" as a pejorative always reminds me of the use

of "bleeding heart liberal" and "women's libber" as insults. Those who are liberal or who truly support gender equality don't feel compelled to insult others for doing so.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

265. Yep. Just like "feminazi". Straight out of the boil on Rush Limbaugh's ass.

[Number23]

286. Exactly. And in all reality, it says all you need to know about the person making the "insult"

than those "insulted".

[1StrongBlackMan]

294. Thank you for saying that, so I don't have to. n/t

[cyberswede]

305. Any time, but...

[betsuni]

315. Heh. But no wall is THAT thick.

[XemaSab]

127. QED

n/t

[backscatter712]

235. What I think of people who use "Social Justice Warrior" (SJW) as a pejorative.

It's a good indicator that the person is a racist, or a Red-Piller, Gamergater, or similarly brain-damaged.

At minimum, it indicates that the person using the term is not the least bit interested in hearing the other side of the argument, just in throwing shitty labels at people to caricature them.

Congratulations, AverageJoe90, you've just proven to me that you're too fucking stupid to have an intelligent conversation with. Welcome to my ignore list. Thank you for helping me not waste my time.

[AverageJoe90]

239. I'm sorry you felt that way. nt

[GreatGazoo]

59. There was a big change after the jury system was introduced

Forum admins were more consistent than juries.

Overnight juries seem especially bad -- perhaps easier to stack.

[Nye Bevan]

262. Right. Back then nobody ever complained about inconsistent moderating (nt)

[Nye Bevan]

261. If they had, wouldn't this post have been hidden by now? (nt)

[oldandhappy]

2. Where are they going?

I would like to discover new places. Not 'cuze I am upset, just curious. And I'd like to join in on a new place.

[TheNutcracker]

10. Many go to Old Elm Tree

http://www.oldelmtree.com/

[oldandhappy]

11. thanks

[Warren DeMontague]

24. That place still exists?

damn.

[snooper2]

96. you don't have a login?

Fun place, I have to check it out once a year-

There will probably be thread there now that it was "mentioned" on DU...fuck they are about to go under so they need the hits anyway

[pintobean]

99. Aren't they always about to go under?

I think they've even shut down a few times.

[Warren DeMontague]

325. No. I plead guilty to having one on "disgustingist", though.

But everybody knows who I am there, by now.

Old Elm Tree reminds me of the judean peoples popular front.

[MADem]

30. Wasn't that place formed because of the primary split in 2008?

What's the vibe over there? Doesn't seem too busy.

[Bobbie Jo]

67. Oh dear

Is that place still going?

[SidDithers]

88. ...

Sid

[G_j]

156. what's so funny?

do they have a bunch of people over there who post nothing but ?

[SidDithers]

158. OET is a backwater of bitter former DUers...

They spend their time shitting upon DU and DUers, all the while trying their very hardest to get back to DU with a new account.

They're pathetic.

Sid

[NYC_SKP]

317. Bitter Old Tree

I need to drop in, it's been a while.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

91. Oh, I thought you literally meant an old elm tree.

I had this vision in my head of this bucolic looking elm tree and a person sitting under it, relaxing and taking in the fresh air, thinking, "This is so much better than arguing over the internet."

[treestar]

92. I like it!

Great idea!

[marble falls]

145. They won't let me join, claiming I'm a known spammer. I've been on MIRT here several times an I....

do not spam - not here, not anywhere. Might be a reason that they have a declining membership. They've put too fine a edge on their paring knife.

[marble falls]

170. The only changes I would make is: a six months membership and 500 post minimum to be on a jury ....

and somehow a way to keep MIRT from closing posts that aren't racist, sexist, intemperate, in violation of policy and/or Islamophobic. Maybe a two year membership before being put on MIRT.

I find it odd that a member with 1000+ posts won't get banned for things that newbies posts and get banned for. I think the way anti-vaxers get treated is a shame. Its a discussion and if it remains civil why not discuss it? Calling an anti-vaxer an asshole is acceptable behavior? Even though my kids were vaccinated for childhood diseases I don't think that big pharma is more accurate with the production of serums than they are with their other pharmaceuticals. There is room for divergent civil discussion.

[Number23]

181. That place has been a cemetary for years.

[hrmjustin]

184. I occasionally read them and they do seem like a happy group even though it is small.

They could use more traffic.

[Warren DeMontague]

326. Couldnt we all?

[Skidmore]

209. Only some do.

Lots don't. They just leave. Some develop networks with people from DU with whom they have developed friendships in real life. It is so much more pleasant to get to know someone that way rather than dealing with an faceless persona on DU who decides that he/she knows you better than you do yourself and is ready to slap a meaningless label on you to meet an agenda.

[Quantess]

44. Find other things to do, maybe.

Spending your life debating politics on the internet is an addiction worth overcoming. There is a real world, "meatspace" and it's actually time better spent.

[Fumesucker]

334. Depends to an extent where you live and who inhabits "meatspace" with you

I can't discuss the technical things I'm interested in with anyone around me because they don't know jack about those things and don't want to know, the same goes for politics.

Just about all my meaningful dialogue happens online, where I live you can't even talk about the weather without it getting into really stupid politics.

If I want to discuss the implications of torque ripple in a brushless permanent magnet DC motor as it applies to electric vehicles or the finer points of asteroseismology as they relate to determining the oscillation modes of main sequence stars I have to do it online.

[Autumn]

228. Try this one.

http://democratsforprogress.com/forum/

[oldandhappy]

231. Thank you. Lots.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. My dear WillyT...

I don't think they've ruined the place, not at all...

Remember, the only constant is change.

DU changes as do all message boards.

We evolve.

We're OK.

[chillfactor]

6. evolving is fine...

reading the filth posted by Freepers is not...

[CaliforniaPeggy]

9. I agree! This is why we on MIRT work around the clock to rid DU of freepers.

[chillfactor]

16. Amen!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

112. You must do damn fine work too.

Because I can't remember the last time I saw any actual freeper type posts, just occasional 'Name Removeds'.

[AverageJoe90]

211. Must be some tough work.

But since it keeps the site clean.....

[jaysunb]

7. +1 n/t

[Peregrine Took]

4. Maybe we should do that "zot" thing or whatever the Freepers do to keep libs out of FR?

Just like they can't stand what we have to say I triple can't stand reading their tripe.

[grasswire]

5. who now?

I wish there was a list somewhere. I miss everything.

[Ichingcarpenter]

33. I would like to know too n/t

[old guy]

72. Me too.

Sort of a cemetery.

[Scootaloo]

12. DU's only purpose is revenue generation through ads

In order to pay for Disgustingus's server space

[MADem]

31. Hmmm. So the admins sleep in cots beside the servers?

They don't have families, mortgages, bills, like the rest of us?

And doesn't their other site have ads, too?

This is a private website, with rules. I only wish the rules would be enforced a bit more vigorously, but that's on us, collectively, I guess...?

[Warren DeMontague]

46. It's all a plot! A disgusting discussionist plot!

Discuss.

[geek tragedy]

13. The jury system is very troll friendly

Look at the other site.

[Renew Deal]

14. I agree

[BlueCaliDem]

108. Absolutely. eom

[Nye Bevan]

264. It doesn't take a troll to hide a post that says "you are full of shit".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3502475

[geek tragedy]

290. The jury got that one incorrect.

People who get their information from Alex Jones and Kim Dvorak are, quite literally, full of excrement.

[NaturalHigh]

361. Not everyone who disagree with you is a troll.

[hrmjustin]

15. I am sorry to see many good people not posting anymore or posting less.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

17. I am also sorry to see that...

[hrmjustin]

18. I guess some of the recent political battles has caused problems.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. I think a lot of people have gotten tired of the incessant half-witted bs and agenda-driven axe grinding.

Adults who freely choose what to do with their time generally don't want to waste it being lectured and finger-wagged at by strangers on the internet, about endlessly repetitive nonsensical crap.

[Duckhunter935]

51. I agree with that completely

[RKP5637]

63. +++ 1,000 +++ n/t

[Waiting For Everyman]

78. That is so perfectly said

it should be needlepointed on a pillow somewhere.

[hrmjustin]

97. This is likely why we lost some.

[pintobean]

100. Wow

[hrmjustin]

101. Ok what is you complaint?

[UtahLib]

134. You seem to be the target of choice this week.

Last edited Wed Mar 4, 2015, 03:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Have a great day Justin and remember to flick the gnats aside, thereby depriving them of the attention they so desperately crave.

[hrmjustin]

135. Thanks my friend.

You have a great day.

[whathehell]

167. Sounds about right..

"Adults who freely choose what to do with their time generally don't want to waste it being
lectured and finger sagged at by strangers on the internet about endlessly repetitive nonsensical crap".

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Warren DeMontague]

316. Yep.

Nailed it right squarely in the bullseye with that one, if we say so ourselves.

[KMOD]

19. Give people topics that create general and earnest discussion, and not tit for tat nonsense,

and I'm sure many will return.

just my opinion.

[McCamy Taylor]

20. It's ok. I'm back through November 2016.

Let the good times roll!

[Blue_Tires]

21. +1

Last edited Wed Mar 4, 2015, 12:21 PM - Edit history (1)

Of course I must add that trolls have *always* been here, and decent posters have *always* been driven away as long as I've been reading DU...The difference is in the past, our "replacement rate" of decent, intelligent, sane posters was more than enough to sustain the losses...

But since DU 3.0, the replacement rate has fallen off the table...Legacy DUers would do well to ask themselves "why?"....

[betsuni]

22. The wrecking crew.

They ruin everything. After lurking here for many years the only reason I joined and began commenting (obviously I'm not very good at it) was to support DUers with good judgement and information who were being drowned out by the bullshitters. It's not "both sides do it." Only one side is hell-bent on spreading disinformation and negativity. When I learn more about a political topic over at Gawker, that is not good. I think the trolls get addicted to baiting DU, have a dysfunctional relationship. I hope more lurkers can come out and help, we can beat them!

[HeiressofBickworth]

23. DU must be a resounding success

otherwise trolls would have no interest in disrupting or spreading their bovine excrement all over it.

Let's keep them wasting their time. They'll get no converts here.

[inanna]

25. I agree a thousand percent. n/t

[Scuba]

27. + another

[gelsdorf]

28. Those whose minds are changes by random internet posts

are very weak minded indeed

[FiveGoodMen]

433. That sort of calls into question what we're all doing here

[e-cigdub]

34. I love to post

But im scared to honestly. I have low post count and anything i say comes off as suspicious. even though i honestly have the best of intentions. For example my last post was hidden by jury and literally all i did was speak out against Saudi Arabian funding extremists mosques and how they bully moderate muslims and that we have to keep saudi arabian money and imams out of mosques in western countries and instead promote a moderate and peaceful islam and support all moderate muslims. Literally my post was flagged.. hidden and a partial ban was put on my account. honestly if something as simple as criticizing saudi arabian money and wahhabi version of islam is enough to get you banned from this place then i rather just keep my mouth shut and enjoy threads made by others. Gay rights and being against wahhabi version of islam that distorts true islam are a passion of mine. anyway just giving my thoughts on this thread. Please dont jurry my post again im not here to cause trouble. I enjoy being here and would like to meet new people and make Friends.

[cwydro]

39. Welcome to DU.

But if you have a post hidden that quickly (I didn't see it), it might be best to kind of chill and get to know the place before you jump in to highly controversial issues - religion, guns, MRA crap, etc. Hell, hang out in the lounge a bit...but even there...lol, keep your opinions on restaurants or fried chicken to yourself.

[yuiyoshida]

43. Welcome to DU

[treestar]

77. keep posting and the low count goes away

that sounds like a random hide.

[snooper2]

98. Well, you already have a strike against you with e-cig in the handle

We have some e-cig will KILL THE WORLD nuts around here LOL

[e-cigdub]

160. E-cigs will kill the world

Hahha thanks for the heads up. Me and my boyfriend started an e-cig store last year hens the name. Well i really hope E-cigs arent going to destroy the world cause i inhale that stuff all day at work hahah

[Oilwellian]

179. Welcome to DU e-cigdub

Religion is usually a topic I stay away from when discussing it on a political forum. It will never end well.

Also know, there are many of us who are avid fans of vaping and it's the only thing that helped me quit smoking. As European scientists who have studied vaping for several years say, "ecigs will save millions of lives in the 21st century."

[stage left]

136. Welcome to DU

From a semi-lurker.

[guillaumeb]

154. welcome to Du

there is a medicine for "low post count" that will help you get your count back up to healthy levels.

I think your post about the wahhab version of Islam is right on target. But you must remember that the Saudi theocrats are our friends. Not like the Iranian theocrats who are our enemies.

[CountAllVotes]

307. Welcome to the Democratic Underground e-cigdub!!

and welcome!

[dreamnightwind]

35. Yes it is sad

There are some troll problems, no doubt.

Funny thing, though, everyone sees trolls everywhere, and everyone has their own unique opinion of who the trolls are, depending largely on the ideology of the beholder.

Much of the discord here is based on people with different views of idealism vs pragmatism, populism vs corporatism, identity politics vs more generalized priorities, and where on the left-right spectrum we fall.

We could demonstrate this by naming trolls (please don't) right here in this thread, I think it would quickly become apparent that, other than a few exceptions, one person's troll is another person's ally.

But I get it, I have seen many of the posters I most admired leave this site for other pastures (wish I knew where, I am aware of OET and that is where some of my favorites went, also maybe Reddit? I don't hang out there so don't know)

This can be a pretty hostile environment, keeps me from posting much. I do learn a lot here by reading way too many OP's and threads, huge time-sink but at least some of it is educational.

Really not looking forward to this place leading up to 2016. For me reading all of the pro-Clinton posts and the coersion that she must be supported if she wins the primary is incredibly painful, I'm sure it works both ways. I wish we could discuss different viewpoints with humility and a spirit of group inquiry rather than so much ideological bullying.

[anotojefiremnesuka]

36. I have been lurking for a while and from what I see those that support HRC for POTUS

seem to be rather aggressive towards those that do not support HRC.

The problem is classic democrats vs corporate democrats and who is going to control the party. It is being played out on DU as corporate Dems, HRC supporters vs liberal/progressive Dems, classic/traditional Dems.

The Corporate Dems seem to be winning here on DU for the time being.

That is just my observation.

[wyldwolf]

42. I've been on DU for 13 years and from what I see from those that OPPOSE HRC for POTUS

... is a group a people who troll right wing sources and other bastions of shoddy journalism looking for any little nugget of controversy to aggressively exploit on DU. They're short-sighted, never considering that if HRC is disposed of here, the next one in line will be in the line of fire from those sources. And won't those DUers wail when it's Warren or Sanders taking the heat on DU.

[betsuni]

52. YES!

[RKP5637]

68. Exactly! IMO it's a concerted effort, anyone can join/post on DU. As you say, and

I agree, it will morph onto someone else. It's a tactic IMO!

[JoePhilly]

76. ^^ THIS ^^

DU's self proclaimed High Priests of Liberalism are constantly demanding a purge of the Democratic party.

They get to decide who the "real liberals" are, and very few can measure up to their pious standards.

[SMC22307]

114. "We are Democrats - All of Us." United, not divided!

Tally ho!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6302389

[Bobbie Jo]

132. Case in point ^^^

Thanks for the demonstration.

Can't say I'm impressed with many of the newer crop of "members."

Tally ho!

[SMC22307]

139. Are tenured members not expected to heed Nance's sage advice?

Obamabots? Liberals weenies? Tsk. UNITED, NOT DIVIDED! No labels!

I won't be driven off, whether you are impressed or not. Trust me.

[Bobbie Jo]

149. What does that even mean??

Nevermind...

I'm really not interested in an explanation at this point.

[Logical]

207. Oh FFS, dramatic much? Some people just do not like her. Some people are more liberal......

than hillary wants to be.

[wyldwolf]

210. "Some people just do not like her." And that I can respect.

Some people, though, fancy themselves oppo research pros and dig through right wing cesspools looking for gold.

[jobycom]

368. My observations as another longtimer, also. And that applies to more than HRC.

The reason I don't post or visit here much anymore is because the quality of discussion has sunk to about the level of Republican/general public/Fox News/AddictingInfo.

I started hanging out here in 2001 or so because, despite the fact that there were multiple degrees of left that I didn't agree with, there was a high level of discussion and intellectual integrity. If I wanted to argue why Ralph Nader was a turncoat, there would be a healthy resistance who would douse me with facts, figures, and logic as to why that wasn't true. I might not have my belief changed, but I would always leave with a better understanding of other opinions, and a slightly different angle for my own beliefs. I was inspired to grow intellectually and ideologically.

Now this place just looks like the typical comments section of any local news site. The few people who argue facts and logic are buried under an avalanche of non-sequiturs, bogus news sources, non-contextual quotes and details, pseudo-science, and just plain old personal insults. I remember when personal attacks would get even legends of DU banished, or at least suspended. Now they seem the norm.

A while back I ventured over here and saw one poster in a thread repeatedly trolling on how evil Islam was, how the religion was sexist and violent and all of the other stuff you'd expect from Franklin Graham and his ilk. I tagged one or two of the posts as racist. I got a message back that said a jury had voted that the comments weren't racist because they weren't about skin color, but about religion. It was an uninformed technical hair-splitting of the type I'm used to from Republicans, but used to not see here so much. (For those that don't understand the terms "race" or "racism," they refer to any grouping by birth or ethnic characterizations--the idea that race is about skin color is one narrow, recent definition. It also refers to language, national origin, ethnic backgrounds, etc, so that Islamophobia and antisemitism are both forms of racism.)

That approach is aimed now at HRC, as it was eight years ago, too. I'm not a particular HRC supporter. Now as then I hope someone I like better gets in the race. I'll vote for her if that's the best of the options. But I hate the level of discourse here now. I can get this on Facebook or the Austin American Statesman's comments section. People are too easily fooled, and too eager to jump into a Republican style debate based on emotions and gimmicks to win an argument rather than an honest discussion to understand the world around us. Yes, it's always been like that to some degree around here. The degree, though, has really changed. This whole jury system doesn't seem to do much about keeping people decent.

So, that's why I'm rarely here, even though I used to live here.

[yuiyoshida]

45. Welcome to DU

[peacebird]

56. True, and they seem hell bent on extracting vows to support HRC when she gets the nomination

Which is highly annoying to those of us who are fervently hoping she implodes like the last time she was expecteded to coronated. Some of us honestly feel she has no chance of winning the general election because the R's so thoroughly detest the Clintons. I personally feel she is too much of a war hawk, corporatist and DINO.

Welcome to DU, I have been here forever and just got banned from a posting in a particular group for the the first time last night.

Primary season generally sucks at DU.

[hrmjustin]

133. You got banned because you violated a safe haven.

[android fan]

189. What safe haven?

Even in the HRC group, I've seen a LOT OF posts attacking Clinton, and people haven't yet completely answered for her wrongdoing.

Now today it was revealed that HRC had her own private email server.

This is the shades of the Bush email scandal all over again.

If Clinton does win the nomination (which is starting to look doubtful every day) I will vote for her.

[hrmjustin]

191. The HRC room is a safe haven and posting negative things are not allowed.

The room is for supporters only.

[Maedhros]

249. I'm happy to not jump in the HRC forum and start picking fights.

However, a number of posters there put up posts with very inflammatory titles (which they know everyone can see) just to piss off Hillary opponents, knowing that opponents can't come and counter the initial jab.

That's pretty classless. If they want to throw down the gloves, come at us in GD. Don't hide in the HRC room and fling poo.

[hrmjustin]

250. Do you have evidence to back this up?

[Maedhros]

253. Just the titles of the threads.

For example:

Hillary haters are busy copying & pasting today. Big yawn.

Hillary Clinton Room Post-Getting sick of these Anti-Hillary Sundays here on DU.

Meta-discussions about posters who cannot respond.

[hrmjustin]

254. Back up your claim and provide evidence.

If not then you are just making accusations against us that are baseless and scurrilous.

[Maedhros]

257. Edited original post to comply. [n/t]

[hrmjustin]

260. So you are accusing me of trying to get people like you to jump in so I can ban you?

[Maedhros]

263. I'm not accusing YOU of anything.

It's clear that the HRC group understands that their thread titles are visible to the entire forum - why else tag so many titles with the "Hillary Clinton Room Post" header.

Thus, it is disingenuous to post a provocative thread title ("Hillary haters are busy copying & pasting today. Big yawn.&quot , knowing that it will piss off people who are called "haters" for disagreeing with Hillary's policy, on a sub-forum in which anyone who would try and refute that incorrect characterization would be tossed out just for doing so.

Passive aggression does not lead to a more enlightened forum.

[hrmjustin]

266. You used one of my titles here and you know I am one of the hosts.

If you used my title in your post you are accusing me of trying to get people who are not supporters into the group.

You know we ban people who refused to respect the sop so how the hell am I to read this.

Perhaps if you are going to make accusations against me and other members you should try to make your accustion straight.

[Maedhros]

268. I didn't check to see who posted the threads.

I just grabbed the first ones that I saw.

My point is that it's somewhat cowardly to call out other posters with provocative thread titles from the safety of the Hillary Clinton Room, where the call-out can't be refuted.

If HRC supporters want to call us out, come do it in GD and let us fight back.

[hrmjustin]

269. You picked ond of my threads so you are personally accusing me of trying to bait people.

You know I am a host there which i mentioned in this thread. So put two and two together and you appear to me to be accusing me of baiting people to come in the HRC room to bait people.

This exchange tells me all I need to know about you.

[Maedhros]

271. On edit, I removed the thread that you are referring to (before our exchange really began).

The other one was the more egregious.

[hrmjustin]

274. On edit nothing. post 253 still has my post title in it.

Who do you think your kidding here?

[Bobbie Jo]

277. Seriously?

If HRC supporters want to call us out, come do it in GD and let us fight back.

This sounds like a schoolyard throw-down.

OMG you guys!!! Meet me at my locker after 3rd period, you won't believe what Sarah and them said about you!!

Sheeeeesh...

[Number23]

292. The folks in the HRC forum are about to learn BEYOND ALL DOUBT the living hell that BOG

hosts have had to endure for the last 7 years. This crap is beyond stupid and the woman hasn't even declared she's running yet.

I hope they're ready for the tsunami of stupid followed by the whirlwind of whining ("I got BLOCKED from that forum for absotively NO REASON!!1one&quot and the deluge of desperate affirmation ("I was blocked too!1 Only the bestest and smartest people here have been!!one It has absolutely NOTHING to do with us being rude and hateful lunatics that can't let xx's supporters have one small space to themselves!1eleven&quot

It's hard to remember sometimes that this is a place to support DEMOCRATS.

[Bobbie Jo]

297. Oh, I was thinking the same thing

it's coming, alright, complete with all the lame jokes derisive taunting.

I hope they're prepared to batten down the hatches, because they're fixing to get a huge dose of "the treatment."

I'm starting to detect a pattern here.

Yep, when you have to post to a protected group to support DEMOCRATS on a DEMOCRATIC board...

and...

when you see things like -come out here so we can fight back? What the actual fuck is that? This place has truly fucking lost it.

[AtheistCrusader]

311. .

[AtheistCrusader]

313. That would never happen. I believe you Justin.

[misterhighwasted]

275. I visit Hillary Room occasionallyand see NO ONE taunting the "opponents."

Unfortunately when a post is made in such rooms, it shows up on Latest Threads.
Be sure to note which room you are entering so as not to go there if it will cause you to be upset.

I post there so I don't have to deal with those who would like to pose a threat as to "throwing down the gloves."

Its a Private Group. If what is posted there bothers you and you are upset that you can't go in and disrupt then I suggest you should take the matter of Private Rooms up with the Admins.

Trust me here, we post in Private Rooms not to piss anyone off & taunt with Headlines. Its not intentional & I don't know anyone who would even think of doing that in the Hillary Room. We are fine & happy without any disruptors.
If we wanted a debate, we would post in GD.

If you want to get a poster's attention, who is enjoying the fellow debate among roommates in a Private Room, and your intent is to get them to come into GD to throw down the gloves then by all means State your case & call us out & I am sure someone will be happy to respond.

No one is intentionally hiding out nor taunting you.
Its a Private Group for a reason.

Perhaps you could start your own Group.
Might be good for you..for what ever you need.
There are many forums & groups to visit here on DU.
Everything from Politics to Anger Management to Spiritual Healing to E Cigs, (I think).
Have a look around.
You should find like minds to enjoy your time with here on DU.

Best I can help you out with.

[William769]

278. We have to wear our boots enough as it is.

It's nice to have a place to be in peace.

BTW, they are protected Groups for a reason.

[pintobean]

194. .

[hrmjustin]

195. When you become a host and take responsibility for running anything here I might listen to what you

have to say.

[MisterP]

161. in Latin American parties it's called "officialism": the majority or controlling force of a party

is interested only in the self-perpetuation of a "political class" and serves the oligarchs

you can tell these parties by the fact that they use heated rhetoric against the other party to cover up the fact that their policies are generally indistinguishable, or their riding on 80- or 50-year-old accomplishments

[anotojefiremnesuka]

234. Vow's of Support, eh? Just like a cult! How do they enforce it, cyber bullying?

[peacebird]

237. Welcome to DU!

[hrmjustin]

240. I am one of the hosts of the HRC room and if someone violates our rules we have the power to ban the

from the room.

[anotojefiremnesuka]

324. Not being a fan of the future representive of Goldman Sachs, the HRC Room is a place to avoid

thanks for the warning.

BTW feel free to do a preemptive banning of me from the HRC Group too, I would hate to accidently enter it and post something that may offend the delicate sensibilities of the group members.

[hrmjustin]

330. I can't ban you unless you post in the room.

Just read the room the post is being posted in and you should be fine.

[1StrongBlackMan]

298. Funny ...

I keep seeing people talking about all those that support HRC for POTUS; but, I have not seen any/more than a few say anything more supportive than, "I will vote for her if she is the Democratic nominee.

Funnier ... whenever I ask for someone/anyone to link to these aggressive posts in support of HRC,no one responds ... and when they do, it is a link to someone correcting the latest outrage with respect to HRC.

Perhaps you can help a Brother out here ... and point me to a couple of these posts.

[cwydro]

38. I agree with Peg.

I'm frequently on juries too.

I'm not a troll, and I usually vote to leave most posts unless they are completely out of line.

My fellow jurors seem also to be fair on most alerts. I think most jurors do their best to be fair.

I joined DU almost 10 years ago...if anything lol, it is calmer than when I first began participating. There were some legendary battles back in the day.

We should all be kinder to each other, even if we vehemently disagree at times.

[Blanks]

245. I try to leave most posts too...

A lot of times there is some war going on between two folks and they just need to take a time out from each other.

The juries that I have served on seemed fair, I think the whole system works pretty good.

I haven't been here for a long time, but in my time here it slows down between elections, that's probably the biggest factor deciding how many people are around IMHO.

[cwydro]

280. Agree. nt

[wyldwolf]

41. RE: The jury system

I'd agree with DUer who said the qualifications for serving should be raised, but it isn't trolls who've ruined the jury system. It's the long time/mid time grudge-holding DUers. The sytem is personality-driven, not content-driven.

[AsahinaKimi]

48. I am not posting as much as I used to..

Sorry about that, been way too busy, but I look in from time to time.

[Major Hogwash]

318. Me neither.

However, I suspect that for the people who don't like me, it must seem to them that I spend at least 14 hours a day posting here every day of the week!

[mfcorey1]

49. Who can blame them! There is so much anti democratic principles and rhetoric until

one might as well join freerepublic. Just saying! Flame away!

[Phentex]

54. nothing delights me more...

Than knowing you signed up just so you could post this.

You have made this feminist VERY HAPPY today.

[Phentex]

58. Clear as mud.

I'm sorry you are in such pain.

[Phentex]

62. also, do you mind if I quote you?

"It all started going wrong when the HOF and African American groups were created

The bullying and the trouble the members of these divisive groups have caused has done irreparable damage to DU it seems. It was only a matter of time before we saw a backlash from the majority of normal members who are tired of the bullying and the constant purity tests."

Gary201, you said a mouthful.

[betsuni]

105. I made notes when I saw that one, too.

I also take notes when some dim bulb who puts quotation marks around "whites" moans about being a victim of feminists and African-Americans alerting on his posts 'cause, like, he actually gets along fairly well with most of the black folks he's interacted with in general (women, well ... ), but why, oh why, don't they listen to the voice of "white" reason? One tries to help these inferiors, but do they listen? To be honest, no, they do not.

[F4lconF16]

142. *snort* To be honest, I'm laughing my ass off right now.

One tries to help these inferiors, but do they listen? To be honest, no, they do not

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

157. Wow, that is some hate there from that guy

[seaglass]

171. Someone upthread said the same thing but with much more subtlety, point was taken however.n/t

[seabeyond]

349. a small handful of men on this thread, on DI blame feminists and AA about du, often.

they call us out, say nasty shit, and are allowed, as we mind our own business. they blame us for constantly shit stirring. yet, inevitably it is them stirring the shit as they have done on this thread and often do on DI. they have issue with women talking feminists issues and blacks calling out racist issues. yet, the women and the blacks are the base of the party, and these issues are democratic progressive issues and surely should be a part of the discussion on a democratic progressive board.

peruse the thread, and the same men that have derailed and flamed will be the same men on di that constantly bring us to DI to insult and name call.

[Starry Messenger]

172. "Normal," heh.

[underpants]

57. Eh, DU wise and otherwise

Take it for what it is. I don't get into it with trolls but them I must not read into threads that deeply. If someone is talking nonsense I tend to ignore them.

[NaturalHigh]

60. No, I can't say that I have.

I've noticed that some people post less in particular groups and forums, but I still see them around from time to time.

[Phentex]

64. Not really...

more people come along to replace the ones that choose to leave.

[CJCRANE]

65. DU goes in waves.

There's always some internecine conflict going on.

The bottom line is that people might have different opinions and might disagree with you.

If they didn't there wouldn't be much point in having a discussion board.

[ScreamingMeemie]

66. It's almost primary time. The annoying big mouths on both sides of any argument here

are just as loud and attention-starved as they are every four years. Because whoever screeches the loudest is right.

[pintobean]

69. Who are the trolls?

The purity police, who swarm good DUers for not conforming to their groupthink on an issue?

I think they're the ones driving people away.

[NaturalHigh]

87. I think I might know what you're talking about.

Saying any more than that will get me an alert (and probably a hide), but I'm thinking you have a point here.

[pintobean]

89. It's several cliques

with some cross membership, and sometimes the cliques work together. The swarm attacks are disgusting.

[Andy823]

150. I agree

And many of us who are not part of said "cliques" have been victims of the swarms attacks by using the alert button.

[AverageJoe90]

188. Sad but goddamn true.

It's happened to me as well. Some of my experience in this regard was laid out briefly in reply #40 to this thread. Unfortunately, however, I don't see this coming to an end any time soon.

[1StrongBlackMan]

299. Well, I unabashedly claim a clique ...

We are easily identified. We speak proudly of being a Democrat and support traditional Democratic values beyond fighting the 1% and we are data and knowledge driven.

Unfortunately, my clique is being run off and drowned out.

[seabeyond]

350. if only racism and misogyny and homophobia was allow on a democratic progressive board,

then others would be so much more comfortable, dontcha know. how dare progressive democratics call out the "'isms".

[1StrongBlackMan]

360. Oh, it's allowed ...

so long as it is "them" that do the racist, misogynistic and homophobic stuff, and so long as any discussion can be turned to a discussion of classism. If not, then it is divisive, disruptive or dismissed as divisive and/or disruptive.

There we talked about it ... Now, can we talk about what's REALLY important ... MY pocket?

[seabeyond]

363. the same ole comes on this thread and calls out groups, the staple of the democratic party.

and they are not challenged. that is what they want. not that i started any shit, just went down the thread calling them out. that will make me the bad guy, that runs people off the board. they can throw their jabs, out of the blue, with no encouragement, but a woman, or you dare to call them on it..... and the apocalypse begins.

[Octafish]

168. Someone here didn't like me mentioning what Rahm said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6310850

I'd bet someone there didn't like what I post elsewhere, too.

[Logical]

208. +1000, my god the whining here is also getting old. nt

[seabeyond]

353. and who is doing the whining? sounds like pinto.... not getting to put his misogynist crap on du.

or wait. he doesnt put shit up, .... he just is in the middle of every meta, fueling the flame.

[seabeyond]

351. how long has this thread been up? and the men that spend their time on DI dissing duers are here to

blame women with name calling. purity police? nice. a small handful of you men, that work towards flaming and disrupting, are all here to blame women and blacks for what du goes thru. you feel awfully comfortable insulting groups of people without hesitation you will be called on it or get a hide. bully .... for you.

every one of you have made an appearance on this thread throwing a jab at the mean ole women.

[pintobean]

356. My post has nothing to do with race and/or gender.

Your reaction says a lot about you, though.

[seabeyond]

358. bullshit. "purity police" says it all, along with a posting history both on DI and DU

[pintobean]

362. Well, you seem to think the shoe fits

You weren't one of the people I had in mind.
Now... ?

[seabeyond]

366. this post has nothing to do with what i said to you, just bullshit backtracking. whatever

[pintobean]

367. Huh?

Maybe you're replying from "my posts" and getting confused. Try slowing down a little bit.

[Octafish]

70. Lot of teamwork on the part of DUers who don't contribute a damn thing but insults.

Here's an example, I complement a DUer:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026300021#post215

In the tag team replies, she gets smeared as a homophobe -- something that had nothing to do with the post, thread or sub-thread.

IMFO, what the idea is to get a response that it deserves -- calling the posters asswipes, shitstains and douchebags -- in order to call in a jury for a personal attack.

It's not just happening to me. All DUers are getting tired of it.

[Puglover]

79. Pretty much why I just lurk now.

We have absentee landlords that call themselves admin.

We have posters who contribute nothing, NOTHING of substance to DU. Snark snarky emoticans, high fiving their pals when their pals deliver extra delicious snark, and of course the "I really don't post here because DU isn't what it used to be, it's such a cesspool but hey here is another OP" types. I certainly have delivered my share of snark when annoyed by another poster. But it doesn't feel good and simply isn't fun.

It's boring and not maintained anymore. And the website suffers because of it. Thank God Spring is going to spring soon and the garden and outside will be available again. This is my last awful winter in the US. I am not good at waiting so it has been a long one.

[Octafish]

83. Those who are undemocratic stand out.

No sense spelling out for them what they do to make themselves obvious, but it is obvious. But good DUers can spot those who use information for advancing democracy and those who use it to protect the status quo. Then, they're isshules wearing a big "I" on their foreheads.



Thank you for being there all these years, Puglover. You have no idea how just the sight of you handle makes me happy, knowing there is a friend fighting the good fight. Please know wherever you are -- just the thought you are there makes ours a better world.

[Puglover]

86. Aw thanks.

Really. It's my birthday today. So your post is very much an added cherry.

[Octafish]

93. Happy Birthday, Puglover!

One of the great traditions in my family is Cheapness. We re-gift. My wonderful wife even mistakenly give away her personalized stationery one happy Holiday season not too long ago to my mom. Thing was, it didn't have my wife's name on it, but her sister's. Much hilarity in the explanation. So, in keeping with this tradition, please allow me to give to you something I found on the Internet:

Space in Text

Personally, I like the "Intelligent Donkey" parts.

PS: I thought it was you who told me you liked "Octafish" as a name better than my original "Oblomov" back in '03. Going by the people who see red at the sight of it means things certainly worked out that way.

[Enthusiast]

129. Happy Birthday, Puglover!

[Puglover]

131. Thanks very much!

[pecwae]

164. Happy birthday!

And thanks for being a great co-Mod with me years back. I look on those as the good ol' days now.

[Puglover]

165. Yeah isn't that crazy Pecwae???

DU was a lot more of a civilized place to hang. I honestly think had admin changed just ONE thing it would be so much better around here.

1. Keep the mods.

2. Keep the necessity for consensus for any action taken and take no action if no consensus was met.

3. Rotate the mods in and out as MIRT does now.

4. Here's the change. Lose the "deleted" message idiocy and simply hide the alerted post if consensus was reached. That way transparency would not be in question. Oh and as an after thought. Attach the moderator names to the hidden message. Wouldn't THAT be something?

Easy simple. But no, the precious jury system is not to be questioned. Ugh.

Thanks for the B day wishes. My last birthday here in the states and certainly my last ugly cold Winter here.

[ScreamingMeemie]

218. Happy Birthday to one of my ALL Time FAVORITE DUERS...

And many more. We are lucky to have you here.

[Puglover]

230. Thanks Darlin.

I think of you often and wonder how you're doing.

Still have your blog?

[ScreamingMeemie]

238. I do. Haven't touched it in a long time.

It's funny because business is slow, so I was just thinking about going back to it today.

We're doing okay. WannaBe is all grown up (25 yesterday!) and happy with her longtime BF in FL. BabyG is turning my hair slowly grayer at 16. He's a good kid though. It's so crazy to think he was only 4 when I first logged in here.

[Puglover]

241. When he is 21 he will be Mom's biggest champion.

[malokvale77]

248. Aw yes the garden is calling.

I'm going stir crazy waiting for the weather to cooperate.

[SidDithers]

90. Homophobes don't belong at DU...

Neither do those that promote the writings of homophobes like Wayne Madsen, or the writings of racist shitbags like Paul Craig Roberts.

Sid

[Octafish]

103. Nice smear.

When you can't argue the facts, attack the messenger.

For instance: How's Naomi Klein doing? You wrote you "remember" she was a bit of a drinker, SidDithers of DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022146890#post82

[SidDithers]

106. Homophobes don't belong at DU...

zombies who were banned for being homophobes especially don't belong at DU.

Posters who promote and legitimize homophobic and racist authors don't belong at DU either.

Sid

[Octafish]

115. Smear artists do, though?

If I was any of that, you'd show where.

Seeing how you don't, that shows what you are.

[SidDithers]

121. What, you deny that you link to the writers like Wayne Madsen and Paul Craig Roberts?...

or you deny that Wayne Madsen is an asshat homophobe and PCR is an white-nationalist racist?



Sid

[Octafish]

122. You didn't bookmark this?

I've asked you, repeatedly over the years, to show what you term my "propensity for promoting and legitimizing the work of noted bigots, racists, homophobes and conspiracy theorist lunatics. You're a guy who thinks white-nationalist Paul Craig Roberts and insane homophobe Wayne Madsen are credible, and appropriate sources for use on a progressive message board."

Seeing how you fail to actually show any of that, I want these to be in the record for all DU to see:

Where I quoted Roberts when he supported Don Siegelman:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022073759


Where I quoted Madsen recently to document the business links between Bush and bin Laden:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6059251


Where I first quoted Madsen on DU2 in 2003 (earlier examples exist, but none so illustrative):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x610051


Where you smear Naomi Klein, making me think the practice is your speciality:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5318151


You will note that I did not support any theory, smear, or lie; I only posted what these people wrote. And as far I as I knew or know, none of these people are anything like what you describe, SidDithers of DU.

What's a person called who repeats something that is not true, SidDithers of DU?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026178887#post110

[SidDithers]

124. You are denying that Madsen is a homophobe and PCR is a racist?...

just so we're clear.

Sid

[Caretha]

345. What is this Sid?

Did you ever watch any Monty Python? Reading this exchange between you an Octofish reminds me of the scene "Burn The Witch", where one of the rabble is a character yelling, "she turned me into a newt!".

In all my years here Sid, I've yet to read a single post that you have put up that contains any content, but none the less you have endless snark for those who do. You don't even argue the points you disagree with, you simply fling poo & smear, like he "Had boxes in his garage!" or ie "Burn The Witch!"

And then there's your best rebuttal...

[lumberjack_jeff]

140. Agree.

The tag-teaming and dog-whistling got old. On the plus side, the worst offenders have mostly left too. Voluntarily, sadly.

[seabeyond]

357. yes jeff, cause how horrible it is that the MRA and white men do not vote dem because the women and

AA have an agenda when it comes to racism and misogyny. if only the women and blacks would shut up, you all would be so much more comfortable. yes.... a lot of women have left. the "worst" offender that called out the shit. with flame thread after flame thread. but hey..... you now have both DI and Du to have your white MRA playground, so yea!!! right?

[sheshe2]

423. Results!

On Thu Mar 5, 2015, 06:16 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

yes jeff, cause how horrible it is that the MRA and white men do not vote dem because the women and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6315939

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling out yet another good poster who just happens to disagree, with nasty, untruthful personal attacks. Disruptive, rude, insensitive, over-the-top and otherwise inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Mar 5, 2015, 06:44 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree it's hyperbolic nonsense, but I'm leaving it up because it illustrates the OP's point so well.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The truth sometimes hurts, and what has hurt DU big time is the goddamn MRA slime running the women off this site!
This shit started when Skinner was lobbied hard for a 'Mens Group'. Sea was in there fighting for you guys and lobbying right beside you, and all you have done is nothing but stalk and harass the feminists of this site.
If there were any justice here, Lumberjack Jeff and his whole goddamn MRA Group would be gone from DU.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There's an apparent long term discussion going on; and it seems that this poster is miffed (from what I read about the rape issue - on 'seabeyond's postings - the miff "may" be proper). I'm going to grant the WELL established DU party - the benefit of the doubt (and notes of syntax errors that make moi feel not so terrible anymore). - NOTE TO ALL - "IF" it be true that loyal DU'rs are exciting - we MUST shake Skinner up and FIX it...
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leave It. Rather thin skinned. What a
stupid alert, stop wasting the juries time. Or is it that you hold a grudge against sea, hmmmm.........

My damn computer froze! I had to grab my kindle to vote, sea. I was damned if I was going to let you get a hide.

[MerryBlooms]

424. One of the best juries I've ever had the pleasure to serve on.

[seabeyond]

425. yes, a very interesting and talkative group of jurors.

it makes it much more fun, listening to what they have to say.

[MerryBlooms]

427. I'm expcting a 'love' note from either an admin or member.

lol, so I'm kicking up my heels in the Lounge until then.

[sheshe2]

428. MerryBlooms!

Me too~

I panicked when my computer froze when I was about to vote. I barely had time to comment. Not easy on the kindle, and when I tried to write out seabeyond, it auto-corrected to Disneyland.

[MerryBlooms]

431. Disneyland

oh man

[seabeyond]

426. thank you for posting the jury. and thank you for scrambling for your kindle, lmfao....

i can just see it.

i am glad juror 3 still remembers. yes... i was there advocating and backing the men, their group. and look what it got us.

[sheshe2]

430. You, seabeyond, are a gem.

I was not going to let them toss you out! Women have to stand together.

I commented to MerryBlooms, that when I entered your name the kindle auto-corrected to Disneyland.

Brava for the 1-6 leave~

[malokvale77]

246. "DUers who don't contribute a damn thing but insults."

That's my pet peeve. I hate it when a good thread get's derailed or a poster piled on in such a manner.

I'll bet if we were to make separate lists of those particular DUers --- our lists would basically match.

Before I joined DU, I already had a good idea who had something to offer and who I could ignore.

You are in the first group Octafish.

[woo me with science]

369. Well said. Yes, there is an organized smear machine at work.

Always the same group of pro-corporate posters.

[laserhaas]

429. Our allegiance to this realm - has a Value. As such, if it is worth fixing

Then - Let's FIX IT!

[deutsey]

71. I've been here since 2001

and I still value DU as a great source of information.

However, I don't post here anywhere near like I used to. DU has had some epic flame wars (I'm a veteran of a few), but they would eventually burn out once the primaries passed or whatever sparked them was over. These days, it seems like it's more constant. I don't post a lot of times because I usually feel that it's not worth the hassle.

But I'll remain a member here until the information flow dries up or DU becomes a propaganda outlet.

[closeupready]

110. +1. I also think as individuals age and mature (like fine wines, lol),

they tend to let a lot of stuff go, even easy stuff, because life is just too damn short to let stuff on a message board bother you.

[Bluenorthwest]

73. what I notice is that there are maybe a dozen people here who are actually involved in primary

politics and the rest just talk about it.

I also notice that there are many posters on DU who very actively demand that they are 'the left' whom I see as traditionalists, socially conservative, angry at each and every minority which dares ask for equal treatment under the law-when minorities seek that which a 'DU leftist' was born with and takes for granted, the 'DU leftist' calls that 'identity politics' or 'a wedge issue' or they claim that equality is 'just a bone they toss to please you'. Those people are conservatives. They might have a Marxist lexicon woven into their rants against minorities, but when you are ranting against those who seek equality, you favor the status quo, the traditional, the orthodox and obviously those who want to retain rights others do not have while mocking those who want them are self interested, seeking to retain advantage, power and financial hegemony.
If it walks like a conservative, talks like a conservative, and promotes conservatives, it's probably a conservative even if it keeps quacking that it's 'the left'. Conservatives, of course, are casually dishonest. 'I'm on the left' they say 'and equality for minorities is very bad, we need to do as the Pope says.'

[betsuni]

111. Yes, conservatives quacking that they're "left."

Like a flock of geese.

[emulatorloo]

256. Well said, thank you.

[1StrongBlackMan]

303. Very, very well said. n/t.

[n2doc]

80. I disagree

DU is not "ruined". It is what we as a community make of it, within the limits. If you want a better DU, post better stuff. Don't fall for the troll bait. Use the ignore feature to reduce your blood pressure. This isn't some sort of test, you don't have to put up with people who bother you or post stuff that bothers you.

People come and go for their own reasons, just like in the real world.

[Enthusiast]

130. Good post.

[Paladin]

82. Runups to elections are always times of flux at this place.

And trolls are with us always. People come and go.

Everybody take a deep breath and soldier on.

[ellie]

85. I have been here since

they opened the place! I think the trolls have gotten worse in recent months but I am not going anywhere.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

94. Well, some of them just die and we don't know about it.

[closeupready]

102. Not especially - people come and go. I miss some of them, but not others.

And others who've returned after an absence are not especially welcome IMO, but I don't run this board. So eh, whatever.

[NCTraveler]

104. Overall this place is great.

Almost everything around you that involves people is in a state of constant change. With such limited content in your op it is difficult to tell what angle you are coming from. I think ProSense has posted a little here and there. Might be coming back. That would be great. I'm not sure she was run off though. Maybe.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

107. Nope. Who has left?

And is there a specific forum they're posting goodbyes in?

[Bobbie Jo]

117. I think he's talking about

long-time DU'ers.

Of course he can correct me if I'm wrong, but he did make this distinction in the OP

I don't necessarily agree with the premise, but your perception may be different than those who have been around awhile.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

119. No, I realize that

but 'long timers' also seem to me to be prolific commenters, so I'd think even those of us who haven't been around even a year would still have noticed prominent types who suddenly dropped off the radar, although admittedly the 5 strike timeout thing makes it tougher, since a lot of folks disappear for a month or two at a time thanks to 'time-outs'.

[aikoaiko]

113. After 10 years, I noticed that DUers leaving is constant and does not mean much.

[cbayer]

258. +1. This is the right answer.

[Jamastiene]

120. K&R

If it wasn't for people like you and a few others I really like but don't know their other homes on the internet, I would have probably left by now too. I rarely come here any more but maybe one day a week.

The last post I saw the last time I came to DU was a post complaining about how gay people are not gracious enough winners and we are bad people for running the anti-gay wedding cake store out of business or something like that. There are obviously enough bigots around to keep a place like that running if we decide not to shop there. So, I fail to see how we are the big bad wolves for not shopping there since they said we are not welcome. Kinda goes with the you are not welcome the owner gave. I don't know how the poster even expects any gay people to buy stuff from that store when the entire point was that the owner of the store did not want to serve gay people. Somehow, though, it is our fault that store was closed or something. Oh, the irony. What does one even say to a post like that? Why is that on DU? If I wanted to hear that crap, I could just listen to the right wingers where I live spew their garbage. I don't and I won't.

[SidDithers]

123. I've noticed lots of previously banned disruptors...

homophobes, third-party advocates, and general assholes, who create new accounts and sneak back in with a new name, to continue stirring the same shit they were stirring before they were banned. Those are the true trolls that are ruining this place.

That said, DUers come and go.



Sid

[BeanMusical]

166. The OP is not about that and you know it.

Last edited Fri Mar 6, 2015, 07:34 PM - Edit history (1)

[HappyMe]

125. People come and go.

Taking a break can be a good thing.

[SecularMotion]

126. There seem to be a lot less gun nuts

Not sure if they left on their own or they were just banned.

[Zorra]

138. I suggest that people consider the fact that trolls can't be tombstoned

unless, generally, they do something that they can be tombstoned for. I've seen the admins get fed up with long time trolls who were obviously trolls who constantly pushed the envelope without going over the edge, and finally ban them, but this has been an extremely rare occurrence

In this democratic environment, we will have conservatives, paid and unpaid, come here to disrupt, and push their conservative hog swallop. The talented trolls know how to ply their trade, or hobby, so that they can post their subtle conservative propaganda and not get banned. Their goals may be to drive the left away, and/or to slowly chip away at traditional Democratic Party institutions.

And some posters are so conservative that they may seem like trolls. Sometimes they are very self unaware, and have no knowledge or understanding of history don't even realize that they are conservatives. Maybe they were brought up during the Reagan era, and can't break free from the Reagan era propaganda that was hammered into their heads, when day after day they were exposed to a culture and a media that was intent on brainwashing them to believe that conservatives are smarter and better and more capable than liberals.

This brainwashing is one of the main reasons for the existence of the Third Way, ie, "Conservative ideas are better than liberal ideas, and therefore we need to make the Democratic Party more conservative". The brainwashing goes so deep that they may not ever even be able to come around to being able to admit the obvious, that Reagan was nothing more than a vacuous, evil, destructive egotistical asshole. They can't part with the notion that Reagan is a saint, because it this was indelibly imprinted into their core belief system when they were of and impressionable age.

So why get annoyed, and upset, and leave? Just put the trolls, etc., on ignore, or play with them and expose them to whatever degree you can.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

232. Could you please pm me these "conservative" posts?/NT

[KamaAina]

141. Well, I have noticed the number of longtime/newtime DUer's whining about it

in those treacly pity-party "Farewell, cruel world!" threads.

[SMC22307]

148. "Treacly."

GREAT word.

[Enrique]

146. how can we tell if people leave?

unless they post a goodbye post, which is rare?

[Neon Gods]

163. I returned recently after a long hibernation

So I'm just getting my feet wet. I've been asked twice to serve on juries and have turned it down because I'm still not certain of the culture. Do we allow screaming matches or must everyone be civil all the time? How long should one hold off before agreeing to serve on a jury? Do we get per diem and free parking in the DemocraticUnderground parking garage?

Actually I'd like to find a political website where everything I write is then copied into a holy book with me as the deity and final arbiter of truth, but I haven't found one yet, so here I am.

[Phentex]

173. Use your journal!

It's your book of posts. You can keep it holy.

[el_bryanto]

178. Presumption of bad faith

I think more and more if people see someone with a different opinion they assume bad faith; that the person isn't a real DUer and is not just wrong, but a bad person.

Bryant

[AverageJoe90]

187. Yes, this.

Hell, if you guys want an example of this, right here, it just so happens that comments #95 and #175 are fairly good ones.

[cyberswede]

201. I never said you're a bad person.

Your schtick is pretty transparent, though.

[AverageJoe90]

202. You *did*, however, insinuate.....

That I was some sort of *racist*, simply over my placing quotations over the word white and my usage of the term SJW-

In addition, using SWJ as a pejorative is offensive - and in your case, racist - since you felt the need to point out that some of "those DUers" are *gasp* "'white'" - as if only non-white people are interested in social justice.

Which is pretty much the equivalent, not to mention how badly you misinterpreted what I wrote(which, btw, would have taken some effort unless one was just outright clueless).

[cyberswede]

206. I stated that your usage of SJW was racist.

It was.

[AverageJoe90]

217. Hardly.

As I pointed out, many of the people I'd had issues with were of the same general background as myself. And if that's "racist", then what *isn't*? (And, btw, I actually know a few people off site, whether they are white or otherwise, who self-identify as "SJWs" themselves. Is that also "racist" in your view.)?

You see, this honestly clueless response just brings to light the problems that I and others have discussed in this regard.

[seabeyond]

355. posting history matters. enough various people have called you out, explained their issues,

and you ignore it.

posting history matters.

[pintobean]

359. posting history matters

indeed

[seabeyond]

365. yes. call it up pinto, i have no problem with my posting history. i am firmly a progressive dem

[Maedhros]

252. Does the poster respond to facts with facts?

Or do they engage disingenuously, by attacking the source or moving the goal posts or posting snide insults?

That's how I judge "poster" from "troll."

[Logical]

213. Another META Whining post that should be locked. But as usual will not be. nt

[WillyT]

270. You Don't Believe This Was A Healthy Discussion ???

Seems people here had stuff to share... that was possibly productive...

[Logical]

273. It was 100% meta. But the admins are very inconsistent on their administration of those rules. nt

[WillyT]

279. By META... You Mean...We Don't Get To Disscus DU At DU... A Discussion Board...

Sorta like 'Fight Club'...

[Dawgs]

352. What discussion? You gave us your final opinion in the OP.

Perfectly fine to answer a question and start a discussion. The rest of your OP is where you're losing a lot of us.

[liberal N proud]

229. I am back...

I took a break and slowly returned but not nearly as active as before.

It just became to abrasive and when I started to feel that with or against us argument, I left. It was too right wingish for me, if I wanted that, I could visit my brother.

[Puglover]

233. I also notice many Longtime/Newtime

PPRed posters returning over and over and over.............

One just got the boot with well over 1300 posts.

They don't do the place any favors either.

[Pooka Fey]

247. John Kerry 2004 era DUer

Last edited Fri Mar 6, 2015, 02:13 PM - Edit history (1)

I posted regularly for over 2-3 years and I never had to put anyone on "Ignore". I stopped posting here for many years - life happens.

I came back around here just this January, and I already have 5 people on "Ignore" after 8 weeks. I took down all my personal details, too, because "The Wrecking Crew" has taken over DU. There is so much dysfunction here; serious stalking assholes, the hostility level is through the roof.

Of course there are still some of the old guard, and there are always nice people, but this place is only doable now because of "Ignore".

On edit - I've had to add two more Full Ignores to my list in 2 days! My count in now 7 on Ignore! Amazing!

[Corey_Baker08]

394. Agree The Amount Of Democrats Bashing Democrats Is Unprecedented

Or perhaps DU'ers bashing Democrats is more accurate term

[Doctor_J]

251. the party apparatchik and their minions have destroyed the party and the original DU

become completely intolerable to longtime Dems. Today we have people cheering for healthcare stock prices going up, people defending Patreus giving classified information to his mistress, people hoping against hope that we get to keep our lousy healthcare system, and people claiming that wanting government transparency means not allowing any classified material at all.

Such things would have been ruled insane and gotten their proponents booted 14 years ago. Now these they get dozens of rec's. And then there are the vanity threads. DU got broken as the party fell apart, beginning about 2010. No principles, no connection with the party that made the 20th century so great.

Someone recently posted, "Some people support Dem politicians no matter what, some support Dem principles no matter what". Some won't surrender their principles. Others think that bad morals are also bad politics

[mother earth]

255. I don't know what the answer is, but I know what can help...

[cbayer]

259. No. The more it changes, the more it stays the same.

[hunter]

272. So long as I'm here, it's okay.

I've been on the internet a long time. I always wear protection.



But I'm so geekishly cool, I probably don't need it.

[Generic Brad]

281. I'm pretty sure we outnumber the trolls

We are legion. They are contagion. Post void of fear and don't feed the trolls.

[On the Road]

296. I Swear to God,

I have not learned anything new in the last two years here. Very little but credulity and vitriol.

[Agschmid]

302. You sometimes just have to know the right places to look...

[flvegan]

312. They can only ruin what we let them. n/t

[Beausoir]

314. No. It's not nearly the same place it used to be but

there is no mass exodus.

It's just a sad shell these days. No real intelligent discussion. Lots of pearl-clutching and ALERTING ON POSTS.

[LoneWolfWisconsin]

344. Newcomers and T-Trolls

Hey Willie,... LoneWolf here. Been watching this crap 50 years since age 9 when dad watched Sunday morning shows as a Union man before I could watch cartoons, so I have an "Interest" shall I say, and FACTS galore.

The GOP/Koch/Church/NRA/KKK party has a "lock" on most things now. They send daily emails to EVERYONE informing what to say about what and who and how, all coordinated. Meanwhile, at the DNC, Debbie Wasser-Name Schultz can't uncurl her hair let alone knows what to do. They appear not only INCOMPETENT, but invisible.

So to answer your question, they have TEAMS in warehouses doing their dirty work. Today I wondered what are the MOST Blue/Progressive states to live in.. Know what? I did the same last year and got actual answers. This time i got" Red states Rock".. and Red states the Best"... and every/any reference to Blue or Progressive were split into sub groups... "Liberal" and so on,.. in other words, they "Buggar" everything up. It is what Evil does.

The T-Trolls pooped all over HuffPost until they then bought it, so it don't matter now anyway.
I checked DU and like it,.. but I have a Bad feeling it is waaay too late to fix things now unless we actually have
some sort of Revolution,.. by the youth who change things,.. or by every sane person left..LEFT

It is as if an actual "Zombie Disease" has infected them through Fox News.

[cyberswede]

364. Welcome to DU

[Rex]

354. I've noticed a few people constantly complaining about this site and the posters here.

Making subtle threats toward the admins, general whining about how this place is not their own personal echo chamber and it should be.

If we could just get rid of the repeat trolls, there has to be a way.

[Octafish]

379. I'm about done.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6316382

[zappaman]

380. Good hide.

How can you even justify that post?

[Octafish]

391. Quoting Rahm Emanuel got me a hide?

What part of what Rahm Emanuel, the guy who's fixing Chicago for the plutocrats, don't you understand, zappaman?

[zappaman]

392. If you are going to quote someone, then perhaps you should use quote marks.

Just a tip.
And by the way I was referencing the hide you got for being nasty...you know the post you linked to?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6316382

[Octafish]

393. NAZIs in the Republican Party are a serious issue, zappaman.

Nazis and the Republican Party

A Fresh Look

by Carla Binion

Investigative reporter Christopher Simpson says in BLOWBACK that after World War II, Nazi émigrés were
given CIA subsidies to build a far-right-wing power base in the U.S. These Nazis assumed prominent positions
in the Republican Party's "ethnic outreach committees." Simpson documents the fact that these Nazis did not
come to America as individuals but as part of organized groups with fascist political agendas. The Nazi agenda
did not die along with Adolf Hitler. It moved to America (or a part of it did) and joined the far right of the
Republican Party.

Simpson shows how the State Department and the CIA put high-ranking Nazis on the intelligence payroll "for
their expertise in propaganda and psychological warfare," among other purposes. The most important Nazi
employed by the U.S. was Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler's most senior eastern front military intelligence officer. After
Germany's defeat became certain, Gehlen offered the U.S. certain concessions in exchange for his own
protection. Gehlen promoted hyped up cold war propaganda on behalf of the political right in this country, and
helped shape U.S. perceptions of the cold war.

Journalist Russ Bellant (OLD NAZIS, THE NEW RIGHT, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY) shows that
Laszlo Pasztor, a convicted Nazi war collaborator, built the Republican émigré network. Pasztor, who served as
adviser to Republican Paul Weyrich, belonged to the Hungarian Arrow Cross, a group that helped liquidate
Hungary's Jews. Pasztor was founding chairman of the Republican Heritage Groups Council.

Two months before the November 1988 presidential election, a small newspaper, Washington Jewish Week,
disclosed that a coalition for the Bush campaign included a number of outspoken Nazis and anti-Semites. The
article prompted six leaders of Bush's coalition to resign.

According to Russ Bellant, Nazi collaborators involved in the Republican Party included:

1.Radi Slavoff, GOP Heritage Council's executive director, and head of "Bulgarians for Bush." Slavoff was a
member of a Bulgarian fascist group, and he put together an event in Washington honoring Holocaust
denier, Austin App.

2.Florian Galdau, director of GOP outreach efforts among Romanians, and head of "Romanians for Bush."
Galdau was once an Iron Guard recruiter, and he defended convicted Nazi war criminal Valerian Trifa.

3.Nicholas Nazarenko, leader of a Cossack GOP ethnic unit. Nazarenko was an ex-Waffen SS officer.

4.Method Balco, GOP activist. Balco organized yearly memorials for a Nazi puppet regime.

5.Walter Melianovich, head of the GOP's Byelorussian unit. Melianovich worked closely with many Nazi
groups.

6.Bohdan Fedorak, leader of "Ukrainians for Bush." Fedorak headed a Nazi group involved in anti-Jewish
wartime pogroms.

CONTINUED...

http://www.bartcop.com/nazigop.htm

[pintobean]

397. .

[cyberswede]

406. I think you linked to the wrong hidden post

Your link doesn't go to a Rahm quote...but your other hidden post appears to quote Rahm's infamous assessment of liberals.

[Octafish]

407. Sorry about the confusion.

This one I brought up what Rahm said and got hidden:

That's so effing retarded.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6310850


This one referred to that and was also hidden, curiously:

Now you're telling me what I can say?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6316382


Most undemocratic behavior.

[Pooka Fey]

404. I love the quote on your tag line.

Beethoven's music is acoustical philosophy.

[Octafish]

418. A remarkable human being, Ludwig van Beethoven.

After six years of doctors, Beethoven realized his deafness would be life-long. He was at the point of quitting music when he realized what it was all about and moved the art of music to a new dimension.

"Whoever gets to know and understand my music, will be freed from all the misery that drags down others." -- Ludwig van Beethoven

Beethoven is a big part of how I can fight the BFEE.

"The heart grows stronger by facing the evils of the world." -- Ludwig van Beethoven (Fidelio)



The BFEE, or Bush Family Evil Empire, is shorthand for the Powers-That-Be. They are the warmongers, the mass murderers, the corrupt secret government, the banksters, the gangsters, the traitors -- the buy-partisan War Party -- that have long used their positions of political and economic power to enrich themselves and their cronies.

Giving them a name, makes it easier to hold them in the utter contempt they so richly deserve.

How do I fight the BFEE? Simply by telling the truth. For some reason, that makes some people really mad.

[Pooka Fey]

420. Arguably the greatest composer of classical music of all time

as far as evolving the art of classical composition forward. The legacy of Beethoven paralyzed Brahms until around his 50th birthday. I need to purchase the complete Beethoven String Quartets and get to listening, maybe the other Beethoven quote will work for me ---

"Whoever gets to know and understand my music, will be freed from all the misery that drags down others." -- Ludwig van Beethoven

[uhnope]

435. Don't let the door hitya

on yer way out

[Octafish]

436. LOL.

Show anywhere in all you've posted even one OP better than mine.

[spanone]

370. if you're a democrat supporting hillary, it's a hard place to be.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

400. Ain't that the truth!

[carolinayellowdog]

396. not enough masochists or too many sadists

The number of DUers who enjoy being scolded and shamed, insulted and stalked, ganged up on, made to feel unwelcome is definitely insufficient in light of the number who enjoy scolding and shaming, stalking and insulting, ganging up on other DUers and making them feel unwelcome.

[ann---]

401. That's what the

"Ignore" feature is for.

[Cryptoad]

402. Those that whine and preach Hate and Negatively,,,,,,,,,

don't let the door hit you in ass when you leave!

[Pooka Fey]

409. Results of my latest alert from 2 minutes ago. This place is ruined.

Evidence that DU has changed. Only two judges out of 7 agreed with my alert on a poster who deliberately distorts and mutilates my writing to be able to accuse me of promoting ethnic cleansing. One judge even says mutilating my writing is just a "difference of opinion".

Well the cats out of the bag now. Pooka Fey really wants to be just like her pal and good buddy Milosevic in Yugoslavia.

On Thu Mar 5, 2015, 03:29 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

lol, refuse to answer the question and then say "it is pointless to continue the conversation"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=116163

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

Poster deliberately distorts my writing in order to accuse me of promoting ethnic cleansing. I am talking about civil war in Ukraine. That is "the mess" - Civil War. Putin, Merkel, Hollande, and "Yatz" negotiated a cease fire (worked to clean up this mess) during the Minsk Accords in February 2015. Russia is in fact working on "cleaning up this mess" i.e. Civil War in Ukraine. And uhnope says that my post sounds to him like Milosevic's ethnic cleansing? These are the kind of posters that are actively ruining this community.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Mar 5, 2015, 03:35 PM, and voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: So you want to shut someone up because they have a different opinion than you.

No.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: agreed.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[Pooka Fey]

414. But calling someone "Deary" will get your post hidden for rudeness.

This message was hidden by Jury decision. Hide 8.

"You are a bit behind the times, deary, and a little under-educated about the US."

A Jury voted 5-2 to hide this post on Thu Mar 5, 2015, 02:58 AM. Reason: This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

Cannot reply to hidden messages

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141029712#post8

DU Juries have become a travesty.

[kestrel91316]

432. I don't come here much anymore. Too many relative newbies leaning too far right for my tastes.

[L0oniX]

434. Hillary = not interested in DU anymore.

[Blue_Tires]

442. Is it better for me to go out in a blaze of glory and napalm my bridges here?

or to just quietly vanish?


EDIT: just noticed my post number --