Let's review: we are allowed to point out the flaws of candidates who oppose the Democratic

[Squinch]

candidate in the presidential race or any other race.

There is no reason to censor discussions which point out the flaws of candidates who oppose Democratic candidates.

There is no reason to lecture those who are pointing out the flaws of opposing candidates.

If you feel like you want to point out the flaws of candidates opposing the Democrats, you should have at it. Let 'er rip!

In discussing the opposing candidates, there are no rules on the site that say we must limit ourselves to discussions of the advantage of our candidate. We CAN and SHOULD point out the flaws in the opposing candidates.

Those who think posts that point out the flaws in opposing candidates are "traps" are incorrect. Such posts are in no way traps to those who support the Democratic candidates, which is the purpose of this site.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

1. why is there confusion over this?

i am confused at the confusion

[Squinch]

2. Lots of righteous censorship being attempted.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

5. over criticizing republicans? i am really confused. i'm not faking it.

edit: I get it now. YES, we can and should criticize jill stein and whatever other crazy lunatic tries to give this presidency to Donald TRump

[rbrnmw]

6. It's over Jill Stein

[pkdu]

12. You missed the comma between "over" and "Jill" . nt

[pandr32]

14. Ha-ha!

[Squinch]

7. No, over criticising the Green candidate.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

9. I finally figured it out. Yes, you are right. We can and should roundly criticize

anyone who tries to hand over a presidency to someone like Donald Trump

[Squinch]

15. Oh, good. I was trying to send you a more detailed explanation, but something

glitched, and my computer lost it.

[rbrnmw]

3. Democratic Underground

not Green/Indy/Libertarian Underground. Voting Jill Stein is as damaging to the Democratic candidate as voting for Trump is.

[Squinch]

4. Also, she is unquestionably unqualified, and people should not be trying to censor threads that

point that out.

Can't believe this needs to be said...

[rbrnmw]

8. It makes me wonder why they would want to censor that?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. if your posts cricitizing stein is getting hidden, appeal the verdict to the admins

i have had good results with appeal to admins. sometimes the juries get it wrong.

[Iggo]

11. Meta!

[demmiblue]

13. Yep (and a violation of the ToS).

[Squinch]

16. In what way?

[demmiblue]

17. I can't answer because I do not want my post hidden. n/t

[Sissyk]

18. Demmiblue may be talking about this.

Don't interfere with forum moderation
Don't post messages about site rules, enforcement, juries, hosts, administration, alerts, alerters, removed posts, appeals, locked threads, or anything else related to how this website is moderated (except in the Ask the Administrators forum).
Why we have this rule: The purpose of Democratic Underground is to discuss politics, issues, and current events. Open discussion of how the website is run tends to distract from our core purpose.

I took it that way also when I first read it.

JUry, this is to answer a question. Not discuss any of those issues.

[Squinch]

19. I personally would find it very odd if someone thought your posting of this rule

was a violation of this rule.

I don't see how I did anything different.

And from what I have been told, it has already been juried, and it stands.

[Sissyk]

20. Well, I would find it odd, too;

But odd things do happen here. Lol!

[Squinch]

21. Very, very true.