General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI think the new rules will have unintended consequences...
I think it might get rid of many of the trolls that came to DU for the sole purpose of disrupting debate and making snarky comments.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)SCantiGOP
(13,873 posts)I assumed that was a major reason for the policy.
I have no question some of the posters here the past few months were paid, perhaps by Trump/GOP, or were free-lancers who got their kicks by disrupting the "demonrats".
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)whopis01
(3,523 posts)I have been on more juries in the past few days than I ever was before.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)How long is it til I say eh...ill take the next jury.
ProfessorGAC
(65,168 posts)I've been on dozens, probably hundreds, but only 1 each day the last two days. That's uncharacteristically low for me. If i spend more than a couple hours here, i'll be on 2 a day.
Coolest Ranger
(2,034 posts)I been on at least 3 since the new rules launched
sheshe2
(83,898 posts)Crunchy Frog
(26,630 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)We are now acting as mods and I think you are 100% correct.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)A 1 means you fumbled and must be spanked by the board of righteousness.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)One more outburst like that and you're heading for the principal's office!!!
Lord, what smiley do I use to show this was a joke?????
Otherwise....
merrily
(45,251 posts)HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)puffy socks
(1,473 posts)Amaril
(1,267 posts)I see what you did there!
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)seabeckind
(1,957 posts)No one should fear a devil's advocate.
If the argument is so weak and the poster cannot handle that opposition, perhaps the failing lies in the poster.
And with a lucky coin flip, an effective course of action might be lost.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Anything that doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
I learn a lot on DI. Trends in the RWNJ, argument techniques of the fringe. Able to defend against really ruthless vile comments. I have never alerted there. Never felt the need to.
Tho a bit rough and tumble it's not a bad thing.
It's really hard to know what the enemy is up to if you hide behind a wall. (general you, no personal intent)
Moonwalk
(2,322 posts)...It always strikes me as the logic of a bully: "These awful things I'm doing to you will make you stronger; so my cruelty is actually a favor. You're welcome."
I mean, if you really think about it, what doesn't kill you can leave you crippled, insane, broken, damaged, paranoid, shattered, or a shadow of your former self. It can also make you vengeful, hateful, cruel and bitter. None of which sound "stronger" to me. And a lot of which apply to those who've been driven off DI by those ruthless, vile comments. Unless, of course, your view is that all those run-off people were "killed." In which case...how many people do we allowed to be killed so that those that remain will be "stronger"? I kinda think the forum wants to make sure democrats feel welcome and able to discuss politics peacefully, and so have plenty of members...rather than making them feel like they've entered into the hunger games.
And I kinda think democrats that want to "strengthen" their ability to deal with vile comments and hunger game antics will have plenty of chances to do that on forums where they're arguing with republicans. They hardly need to get more of it here.
I'll posit you an alternative quote:
"The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members."
I would hope democrats would try to create a most civilized place to discuss politics. If not for its own sake, then in the hopes that it might spread out to the wider world and, maybe, weaken the trolls rather than requiring that the weak become trolls to survive.
missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)Thank you for that.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)You seem to feel like it is sucking up and being subservient.
I see it as standing up to that bully and being bruised and beaten and emerging a stronger person and ready to deal with even more adversity next time.
The other part of your comment seems to indicate that you need a shield of some sort when on this site. That a protection is needed.
If you feel that way I'm afraid there's nothing I can say. If that isn't your meaning I'm afraid I misunderstood your words.
I feel like if someone has a strong argument they should be able to deal with opposition. On their own, using their own wits, using their own logic.
I have never alerted on anything except for one occasion on DI when the person spewed the most vile insults I've ever seen on the forum. There was just no way to respond. (I might add that I wasn't involved in that exchange)
I usually have tried to respond to a vile comment trying not to be vile but still dealing with it. In the most extreme of situations when it seemed like I was trying to reason with the unreasonable I hit the ignore button and walked away. I think I have fewer than 10 people on ignore.
I also believe that my pain threshold might be a bit higher. Most likely a result of life experiences. No matter.
Enjoy your evening. I'll lurk a bit more after logging off. I think we've reached an equilibrium.
Peace.
REP
(21,691 posts)"From life's school of war: what does not kill me makes me stronger" is a quote from Twilight of the Idols, or, How to Philosophize with a Hammer (Götzen-Dämmerung, oder, Wie man mit dem Hammer philosophir)
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)That my take on it was wrong. A source said:
In pointing out its ironic falsity, Nietzsche also makes the point that the statement is quite useful for controlling others: convincing them to be strong and push through difficult situations, cajoling them into giving up their own lives for the larger cause of their country ("the military school of life" , etc.
http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/149/was-nietzsche-making-fun-of-the-military-mindset-when-he-said-that-which-does-n
So we're into that usual bs ambiguous philosophical stuff.
Depends on situation. But I wasn't talking as much about strength as abstract learning to deal with different situations.
Ok, I won't use it anymore as a quick label. Too much nuance.
Thanks (I think)
REP
(21,691 posts)seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Problem is that I get to wandering off looking for the basis for stuff and then forget why I went there.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)It was started by the owners of democratic underground as a place where democrats and republicans can talk.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)nt
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)RKP5637
(67,112 posts)seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Isn't there a strong tendency that the discussions will become all saccharine? That the site becomes just an echo chamber?
I've always found it helpful after a rousing debate to do a retrospection and on occasion find that I might have missed a different way to interpret a situation.
You don't find that a helpful learning experience?
trumad
(41,692 posts)seabeckind
(1,957 posts)I feel like I'm contributing.
I'd take this further
but
trumad
(41,692 posts)You want to engage morans, go find a place that let's you.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)See ya
ozone_man
(4,825 posts)That's depressing.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)All you had to do was click on "Announcements" to your left and it would take you to the latest announcement by the Admins, Welcome to General Election 2016, and you can read what is and what isn't allowed - with links for more clarification.
So no. No "cheerleading".
TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)ozone_man
(4,825 posts)Mostly cheer leading, some honest discussion. We knew it was coming, but it's still depressing that it has arrived.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Before the change bashing for bashing sake seemed to be acceptable or at least a blind eye.
Now suggesting that an bias is implied is met with a reverse attack of some sort. A response to that, no matter how carefully worded is sometimes alerted.
Catch the wrong jury and your continued input, no matter how useful, is lost forever.
OTOH, I've seen historical instances in real life where that was a good thing. Sometimes forcing the rebel out of the rigid work environment started a whole new industry.
The Green Manalishi
(1,054 posts)Which is to strengthen the position of the Democratic party and Democratic politicians and policies.
Seems pretty clear to me- posts or people who attack our candidates are not welcome, period.
Posts or people who attack other DU members (rather than the argument) are not welcome.
It's all about getting Secretary Clinton elected POTUS and getting justices on the Supreme Court who will work for progressive ends. That and electing as many Democrats to the congress and state offices as possible. Anyone not down with those objectives should *NOT* be made to feel welcome here.
There are plenty of places to debate more general ideas and policies, and I enjoy doing so in those contexts, for there are things propounded by some Democrats with which strongly disagree. And there are places within DU to debate which policy *is* the more progressive, or which will help the progressive cause (Guns, Israel/Palestine, etc).
But, while I strongly supported Bernie, as far as I am concerned anyone or anything that attacks Sec Clinton increases the likelihood of President Trump, and thus has no place here.
I might be wrong, but I bet I'm not in this case.
Plenty of places to look for the 'Truth', I'm here to figure out how to fight the Republican agenda and network with like minded people.
Respectfully,
Dan
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)PoliticalMalcontent
(449 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 21, 2016, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)
People here seem to think in the black and white while the world exists in so many shades of grey.
I haven't been partaking in discussion anymore because what's the point? People demonize you here for having opinions slightly outside of the echo chamber... I find that disappointing and not helpful to democracy or many other aspects of our world.
It's made me question whether I want to be here or not. This is my first internet forum... I've shunned social media networks and forums because it reminds me of just how terrible the world is (also, I'm not exactly teeming with friends). People will probably criticize me for that, but it's true. Have you seeeeeen how many times the same jokes slamming republicans get passed around here? Aren't there enough legitimate reasons to slam republicans (and really all politicians to some degree) without falling back on the same tired tropes repeatedly?
Trump is a damn phony and the fact that so many people support him (not here obviously) tells you about all you need to know about society right now.
Anyway... I'm going to have to take some time to think about what I contribute to these forums, or perhaps more importantly, what I am allowed to contribute to these forums. I feel like my talents might be wasted here, even if I agree with most all of you politically a vast majority of the time.
Thank you for bringing up this point though, seabeckind. A sincere +1.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)I just pretty much ignore the Trump is a poopyhead threads. Yeah, I got it the first 2000 times. I'm most definitely not going to vote for him.
It's a lot like it was in 2008. Maybe a little more brutal but still a good learning experience.
Sure beats the hel out of many of the other sites. By a long, long shot.
I would like to see a little less spillover from the election thread to the general thread but it's something I can deal with.
There's lots of great stuff here. The news feed part is great as are the good reads.
Hang on. It'll settle out.
ozone_man
(4,825 posts)Here anyway. Nevertheless, one can toe the line and survive. Will the limited discussion open any closed minds? Probably not. It becomes an echo chamber. That is GE.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)Unfortunately, what I have seen here has been ridiculous. It is not the norm and I hope you don't think it was. People are worried about echo chambers but the irony is that in the constant bickering, it became an echo chamber of the SAME arguments over and over and over. Sprinkle in some hostility and it was just toxic. Nothing good came out of out. I, for one, have been looking forward to this new forum. And it is proving to be exactly what DU needs.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)What's wrong with that? We shouldn't be afraid to talk about serious issues.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,364 posts)Is that something new with the recent changes?
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)just a posting from someone who suggests you're over the line and quotes or sends you the rules.
It's a lot like someone in your neighborhood association telling you you shouldn't have left your car in the driveway
and then attaches a copy of the bylaws.
In the case of the forum you can try to explain yourself but you're taking a big, big chance. Best to just shake your head and walk away. IOW, the wrong choice of words on your part was upsetting to someone.
Moonwalk
(2,322 posts)..as the person they push the button on. I just did this jury duty. The jury to judges not only the "offensive" comment, but the person who was offended. And they are offers several choices in each judgement.
So. You say something to me and I'm offended. I push the button on you. Hah-hah! I think. I've erased this offensive thing! But not so fast! The choices that a jury gets don't just include "is it offensive or not?" But also "is it deliberately offensive?" The Jury might find your comment offensive, but might realize that you didn't mean it the way. They may recognize that you were just going your way in the debate. And, of course, they might also say, "Nope. Not offensive, don't remove."
AND THEN...whatever the jury decides, I (the person to sent the post to trail) gets put on trail, too. The jury gets asked whether I was justified in asking for a jury to check this post out. AND whether the jury thinks I was really offended, or whether I was trying to cause trouble.
In short, was I trying to discourage debate? So, your fear that this is going to create a situation where "delicate flowers" are going to be pushing the alert button at every turn, and that fear of this will discourage debate doesn't seem likely. Because the person who pushes that alert button might have it come back and bite them. Once people learn this, they'll know that they shouldn't push the alert button unless they really, really think this or that post is going beyond the pale. They'd better be sure the jury will not only see it their way, but see them as justified for pointing it out. Otherwise, they may be the one judged as the troublemaker.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)They are just here to have their existing opinions reinforced.
It used to be a larger group with wider topics and under the new rules it has shrunk considerably.
liberal N proud
(60,344 posts)If I can discuss something with another without throwing barbs at one another, then the debate is not only healthy but should be welcomed.
I don't think the new rules have to discourage debate, just reminds everyone that we need to be civil in our discussions.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Sometimes in the heat of the moment someone might do a poor choice of words that is taken literally.
And then never gets a chance to explain.
Civil is sometimes in the eye of the beholder.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)If you use the word "corporate" in any discussion it is obvious that you are referring to a certain candidate and the post risk being hidden.
The same thing goes with anti-war.
I've been having a hard time dancing around those terms and not discussing them. They are two things that I'm not willing to bend or flex on.
I'm not trying to be passive aggressive here, but I believe this post I just wrote even risks being hidden.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)I've been on three juries in this "new era" so far, and while I like the anonymity of it, I've never heard back on what any of the results were.
Is that a new feature, too?
New feature.
villager
(26,001 posts)..since I haven't seen, or clearly missed, that aspect/explanation of the "new rules?"
petronius
(26,603 posts)They want jurors to move on and forget about it after voting:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910796
villager
(26,001 posts)...are notified through PMs, then, at least.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)granted, they were on ridiculous alerts. That being said, it is probably best to not be able to do it.
wryter2000
(46,081 posts)I like to know if I'm in agreement with other DUers. I'd be happy to go to the thread and see if the post is still there, but I often lose track of it and can't go back to check.
hlthe2b
(102,357 posts)who made the posting or the person to whom they were responding.
unc70
(6,119 posts)In most cases, you can look at the thread before the last juror finishes. You can also use Google and look at the cache.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,176 posts)I was also curious about what other jurors may have written, which is now, sadly, not a part of the process.
But at the very least I'd like a quick message back on what the verdict was and the count.
BTW....just between you and me....I was on one jury case since the revamp. What I did was make sure I copied a key phrase in the OP. Then later on, I did a site search for that phrase to find the thread and post. (It was still there, which supported my vote)
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)It became quite surreal.
villager
(26,001 posts)...such as "really deep shit," "hardly shitty at all," etc. (yes, yes, I jibe, josh and paraphrase... ), I'd like to see how the tallies go.
Also, if something just "barely" doesn't pass muster, is the penalty really the same as something which is -- to use a misapplied term from the recent NBA Finals -- a "flagrant foul?"
babylonsister
(171,090 posts)zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)I liked to see how my point of view matched the general population.
ProfessorGAC
(65,168 posts)I like the streamlining of the process, but i'd still like to know the results. Even if it's just "you voted x and the rest of the jurors did whatever?" Then with no comments, it wouldn't be divisive.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)Hmm. Thanks.
Yonnie3
(17,483 posts)"We have come to view the notifications as a catalyst for forum drama." There's more at
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=10796
After mulling this over, I agree.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)as a constructive suggestion, the notification that an alert has occurred and give the poster a chance to rescind or reword as an alternative before the jury sees it.
Perhaps a notice put on the alerted comment to indicate that it is in dispute. Perhaps include the alerters comment.
A lot of times it is nothing more than a poor choice of words.
villager
(26,001 posts)Have you posted it in "Ask the Admins?"
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Thanks for the suggestion. I'll see what I have to do.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)I didn't see an ask thing anywhere so I guessed.
Thanks
BumRushDaShow
(129,442 posts)I recall that posters used to have the chance to edit if alerted before the post was removed by a mod. Then I think when they put the jury system in place and came up with the "hide" feature (which allowed the post to be view-able if someone wanted to see the original content in the interest of "transparency" , the edit ability went away.
Wednesdays
(17,408 posts)I tend to support that. There'll be a lot fewer pissing contests.
babylonsister
(171,090 posts)on a jury if someone seems to be voicing their opinion. It's not always so black and white.
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)They don't post anything snarky or technically against the rules but they are here.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)... and honest discussion can be interpreted as evil trolls out to burn things to the ground.
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)Too bad you don't like it.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Remember the bit about civil discussion?
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)I was not uncivil in the least.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)The "Too bad you don't like it" was a little "in your face".
Kingofalldems
(38,475 posts)seabeckind
(1,957 posts)TipTok
(2,474 posts)It's not all about you...
I threw out a general garment and you claimed it a perfect fit.
Interesting...
Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #101)
TipTok This message was self-deleted by its author.
wryter2000
(46,081 posts)K&R
Duval
(4,280 posts)Cary
(11,746 posts)They are nothing new. They had some fertile soil here and it's unfortunate.
Ron Paul cultists, and their silly "left-right paradigm" schtick.
vkkv
(3,384 posts)a reader with a heavy Alert Button is going to take offense.
DU members aren't likely to promote a RepubiScum over a Dem any day or in any way.
Moonwalk
(2,322 posts)Is to say something they know will start a fight and polarize democrats. If you sow dissent among your enemies, they won't remember that they ought to be fighting you.
Wednesdays
(17,408 posts)... that came very close to calling for people to vote for tRump if things didn't work out to their liking.
vkkv
(3,384 posts)not read ONE about going for Trump if Bernie did not make it...
Me thinks that u r exaggerating.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)During election season, I suspect it will be hard to complain about democrats. After that, I'll be curious.
My primary concern is that there will way to much concern about HOW something is said, instead of WHAT was said.
Just have to wait and see.
IronLionZion
(45,528 posts)or some other politically controversial event. They just feel so inspired to join our forum on that day for some reason!
I like to welcome them to DU. And then when I check back later I see that most of them have been deleted!
vkkv
(3,384 posts)See how easy it is to come close to warranting an ALERT now??
Bring it!
Gene Debs
(582 posts)they happen to be inconvenient or unpleasant.
sheshe2
(83,898 posts)zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)Basically, if one doesn't spend as much or more time and effort on HOW one says something than WHAT one is saying, there will be risks. Even worse, one can come in and declare anyone with a D a "saint" regardless of what NRA position they back, but if you refer to them as a sinner, you're in trouble.
global1
(25,270 posts)back during the primaries. They were the cause of much of the decension here on DU.
demigoddess
(6,644 posts)with a version of you just don't have the right to disagree on any point.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)lol
Warpy
(111,339 posts)I've had more jury requests in the last two days than I had in the two weeks prior.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Many are still working here.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)RussBLib
(9,035 posts)The primaries are over, right? So what if I preferred Bernie? I'm with Her, now. But I still can't post in the Group of the presumptive nominee?
Time to let bygones be bygones, at least for those who want to be un-banned.
applegrove
(118,778 posts)other. Though I am detecting some very staid detractors in some threads.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)That states that we cannot criticize someone like Anthony Wiener or others of similar character, simply because they are "Democrats". There is a certain line that should not be crossed, in my opinion.
Response to kentuck (Reply #73)
shanti This message was self-deleted by its author.
a la izquierda
(11,797 posts)Ed Manchin suck and is basically a republican?
Great. Corporate, gun toting, scumbag democrats can get a pass.
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)sideshows(some of the silliest mellodramatic bullshit Ive ever seen anywhere), threads jacked by meta discussions, and other drama bullshit which has plagued several forums here.
I personally dont need to see the result of my Jury.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)As it was, nobody knew who the jurors were, anyway.
emulatorloo
(44,182 posts)Always caused ridiculous drama. My theory is that's the reason we don't notification anymore after sitting on a jury.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)People won't do it if it's going to get hidden.
Orrex
(63,224 posts)Ka-ching!
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)Orrex
(63,224 posts)My wife My Good Babushka is the painter, however, so she gets the credit!
Thank you for the kind words!
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)MynameisBlarney
(2,979 posts)This is bad?
mrmpa
(4,033 posts)to be able to see the results of my jury service. I've served about 5 times in the last 3 days. I think I clearly made the right choice and I would like to see validation, or, if I was wrong I would like to review and understand where I might have made the wrong choice.
maindawg
(1,151 posts)Too many flaggings . People get upset too easily. Sometimes when someone has a strong opinion they get flaged when all that is needed is an edit. I mean you should not attack anyone or otherwise be disrespectful. Just because you feel very strongly that some part of our political sphere is askew, maybe you have a point. Its not unheard of for some part of it to be corrupt. And if that corruption is in our backyard we would be twice as bad as they are if we did not root it out.
I never vote to block a post unless it's a personal attack.