Losing a long time DU member is never good.

[Bubzer]

Originally posted to GD... I should have known better:

It might mean that the trolls won and the member was chased away... it might mean someone overstepped the bounds of good taste.
It could mean someone had one too many lapses in judgment... whatever the case, DU is poorer for each loss... both recent, and many many others that have strewn the annals of DU.

It should, in my humble opinion, be considered a personal loss for each member of the board as well. You might be asking: why should I consider some long-time disrupter/poster/adversary that is now gone a personal loss? I'm glad they're gone!

And if that's your stance, there's probably nothing I can say to you to convince you that it is a loss.

To others who might be more open minded, I would offer this perspective; We, as a community, failed those individuals. Whether it be that we were not able to dissuade them from trollish behavior, shelter them from swarm-alerts that would deprive them of their ability to participate, or to bolster them while under personal assault. Whatever the case, each person gone is an opportunity lost.

If that's not an acceptable perspective for you, here's an alternative perspective: It should never have gotten this bad. Every single day, since a couple of months before the primary began, there's been all manner of attacks from all sides. Every. Single. day.

There is no moral high-ground to be had here. It's never been this bad.

DU is eating itself.

This community exists because of it's members. If we cannot take care of our own, then perhaps we don't deserve to have this community.

Maybe I'm completely off base here... and if that's the case, feel free to just ignore this post... or maybe, just maybe, there's something to what I'm saying here. There's some kind of disease afflicting DU... maybe it's just primary season... I hope it is.
But the very long list of once-celebrated past members strikes me, less as a case of cleaning up DU, and more an indication of the chasms slowly ripping DU to pieces.

Anyway, that's just my two cents. Take it or leave it as you see fit.

[jonno99]

1. Wow - best post of the day!

[Else You Are Mad]

2. Too be fair..

I am new here, so I had to read up on all the history objectively to understand what was going on. To be honest, I have to agree with the outcome. From what I read, this had nothing to do with the elimination of dissenting views, it had to do with the need of a business person to deal with a member that was alienating many of the people who use and enjoy his/her service. His banning had nothing to do with his support of Bernie or the passionate way he supported him. He made racist comments in violation of the terms he agreed to abide by when he decided to join this forum. Even though he may have been a beloved member by some, he was alienating people in an needlessly harsh manner.

I am a Bernie supporter, but I cannot condone what that member said.

I am just giving my neutral, unbiased opinion on the matter.

[Bread and Circus]

17. Racist statements? What were they?

[Else You Are Mad]

18. Here is the most recent example I can think of. It was from my Jury duty.

On Fri Mar 18, 2016, 08:06 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Jackpine Radicals is the genuine democratic underground. No garkies allowed. nt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=151010

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"No garkies allowed". This a a racist dog whistle from the very same poster who called Black Lives Matter "race naggers".

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 18, 2016, 08:15 AM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Where's the "insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate." part?
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Can't hide racism with clever misspellings. Poster has a history of racist dog whistles.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Given the facts provided and the nature of the thread in general, I have to vote to hide it.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Bread and Circus]

30. In your words tell me what statements you think are racist.

[Else You Are Mad]

40. Ok, Here you go:

He excerpted an obviously racist blog post, which I will point out below. As I said, I am new here so I do not know this person and cannot attest to his actual beliefs. Others have said he has posted other racist things, I cannot speak to that, I can only speak to this post that got him banned.


They are yoked to Hillary by co-dependency When one says a black person is yoked that is a direct inference to slavery & it seems to be intentionally chosen. Yoked is too attach two beasts of burden to plow.

What this sad diminished thinking shows is a lack of confident independence, an inability to reason[...] In this case, he is saying that blacks are not smart enough to make their own decisions.

I find it depressing to see so many “regular people” chaining themselves so emotionally and naively to the Hillary personality cult, and feeling so uplifted by this delusion. The quotes around regular people indicates that he does not believe that black Hillary supporters are regular people. Otherwise, why else would he add the quotation marks if not to indicate his disapproval of said group. Also, again, he uses unnecessary slavery imagery by saying those 'those less than intelligent' black voters are chained to a white slave holder that is taking advantage of them but they don't know any better.

Perhaps the single biggest weakness of Bernie Sanders campaign is that it relies on there being a sufficient majority of healthy independent minds capable of critical thinking. I sure hope there are. Here, he is implying, given the content of the post as a whole, that there is something mentally wrong (they lack critical thinking skills) with black voters.


Here is the link to the post in question.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1520728

[Bread and Circus]

42. Hmmm... I have a few things to say about this

1.) People on DU say this kind of stuff about people who vote Republican all the time. I don't see anyone cry foul when DU'ers say this kind of stuff about the political opposition. I guess some animals are just more equal than others.

2.) The linked article is written by Manuel García, Jr... from Counterpunch. First off, this doesn't seem like the name of a white aryan supremacist but I could be wrong. Also, he and Counterpunch aren't really known to be racist as far as I know. Do you know something different?

3.) People like Bravenak, who are on record saying they are willing to hate Jews (I was surprised but there it is, go look it up) are allowed to spew hate and division again and again but posting to a left wing website that seems to really get to the heart of the matter on a lot of issues is not ok?

4.) I actually do think people who support candidates like Hillary really are voting against their own interest. I think they are no better than Republicans who vote against their own interest. To me, it's an a different form of stupidity (or insanity, if you subscribe to Einstein's definition). To me that's what the article states. To me, the article is holding up a mirror people need to look into.

5.) There are too many "sacred cows" on DU when it comes to identity politics, which is actually degrading the debate this Primary season. If DU wants to call itself "Identity Politics Underground" then it should just do it.

6.) This strategy of painting Sanders and his supporters as racists over the past 9 months or more has been a coordinated swift boating of Sanders. Before this primary season I NEVER seen this notion that somehow the hardcore left are a bunch of out of touch white supremacists. But here we are and how we got here is not a mistake. It basically amounts to a "when did you stop beating your wife" frame. It's a strategy that presumes guilt and forces the accused to prove a negative, which is often impossible when it comes to the court of public opinion that is built to serve entrenched power.

===

I don't know, it seems strange to me that all of sudden a bunch of people who were placed on break for repeated offenses are now pardoned because of the results of one Primary day (that was heavily weighted for Clinton to win by demographics) and a long time poster with what, 2 ?? hides out of 30,000, is now banned for linking to an article that seems to actually express what a lot of people really think is really hurting everyone left of center.

I am sorry but you can't really support Sanders without feeling the system Hillary Clinton represents is fundamentally corrupt. It is his whole message.

I just don't agree with your assessment.

WillyT may be abrasive to some. He may also be racist (I don't know really, because I don't really know that person). But to me, what you linked is not racist.

But I am sure you, and any HRC poster in GDP, would say that last sentence was racist, tone deaf, and speaks of "white privilege". And that goes to the heart of what I see here, because there's no way you can defend against such accusations. Again, "when did you stop beating your wife?!? So you deny beating her? Then you are liar and a wife beater!" and on and on...

At this point, it seems evident Clinton is the odds on favorite to win (though I think Sanders should still press on the the convention) and as such Skinner has handed her supporters here a free pass, the bullhorn, and a slap on the wrist to Sanders supporters because why? So that some RW site doesn't link to DU as some source of internal division? So we can have the fake appearance of a "unified front"??? Do we really think DU could actually derail Clinton's candidacy? DU is that powerful? And if we enforce a silence or else facade, isn't that really a form of propaganda? What about political free speech? And if this really is just a capital D Democratic website only... why the heck are so many people still here? It seems to me that the majority of DU members are really against this sort of corruption we are seeing in both parties.

And we are supposed to vote for Clinton now why? To defeat Trump to what? Help the people that are calling us racist? Yeah that feels real good.

Jesus, the whole nomination has been a charade anyway for the most part. Since when have we had such a coddled and spoon fed candidate as we have with Clinton?

She imploded 8 years ago and almost did so again...against a cranky old wild haired Jew with crazy notions of world peace and prosperity.....so there's that.

I don't blame people like WillyT for being passionate. I can't say what his motives are/were but it seems most of the articles he linked were beneficial and good to read. It just seems to me justice has not been served.

[Else You Are Mad]

43. I just answered your question.

I cannot speak to what you said about DU, and I stand behind what I said regarding the article.

That said, what you said regarding the nomination process and how the DNC and the media has treated Sanders is spot on. It is obvious that the whole primary season has been a sham in favor of Hillary.

Sanders has been effed over by the DNC to the point where they don't even try to hide that they are doing it.

[mountain grammy]

55. Thank you

I'm pretty disgusted. I try to stay away from the drama, but this is my favorite website and It's beginning to feel like a purge.
I have also liked WillyT and found many of his posts beneficial and good to read. Does that make me a racist? I feel like that's the perception here. What a shame.

[BernieforPres2016]

3. I think it was a disgrace that the person in question was banned

I looked and he had only been alerted on 2 of over 33,000 posts (.06%). His post referenced an article in a left wing publication, not a right wing publication. He was targeted by a person who I understand was just allowed back on DU after previously being on some kind of probation. The alerter has admitted he makes inflammatory posts. The post in question was only hidden by a 5-2 jury vote.

And with all these facts, a DU administrator took it on himself to ban this person from DU.

[rhett o rick]

4. All of the outspoken progressive are being banned one by one. And now Skinner has opened the cell

doors and essentially said that their will be no punishment for too many hides. And people will be losing their jury privileges w/o warning. Hello! We are not proportionally represented by Admins, by MIRT, by hosts. Those that use the alert system to silence those of use with a different worldview are allowed. Even people that were on suspension could harass via the alert system.

The only power progressives had was the jury system. I suggest putting them on ignore.

[BernieforPres2016]

6. I think the only thing to do is to leave this place to the Third Way Clintonistas

This place is basically an arm of the DNC, and we've all seen what the DNC is.

[dana_b]

21. I think I'm with you

I really do like the format here and find it easy to post but the environment is SO toxic. I only feel "safe" in this group and even then I wish we had a dead bolt on the door.

[ananda]

35. This is not a site friendly to liberals.

People will find any excuse to target liberals
who write effectively on a consistent basis.

[hlthe2b]

16. I offer no judgement on the PPR, but just a correction. Poster in question was NOT alerted only 2x

but rather received 2 adverse jury results against them. The two hidden posts say nothing about how many alerts may have been both received and juried with a deadlocked or favorable decision.

As one who has averaged jury duty 1-2x daily for the past year, I feel pretty comfortable in saying I've seen quite a few alerts that ended up more favorably for that poster. So, I don't think the "deck" was in any way stacked against them.

[BernieforPres2016]

23. Thanks for the correction

I thought the 2 number was alerted posts, not hidden posts.

I'm not questioning the jury process. The person's post was hidden by a 5-2 vote and I'm fine with that. What I was questioning is an administrator would take a 5-2 jury vote to hide a post, along with one other hidden post out of 33,000, and ban that person. Have you ever seen something like that before?

And if an administrator is applying those kinds of standards, how does he not ban somebody who comes back from an imposed exile and almost immediately publicly celebrates getting an enemy banned?

[BernieforPres2016]

5. Here's a link to the celebratory thread by the person who got the ban

Don't think they will stop with this one.

The OP in this one was so offended by the post that he alerted on that he led this thread with a link to it so others could read it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/118745760

[kath]

7. That person posts many, many toxic, divisive, shit-stirring posts,

probably more than any other DUer. Yet she has a yooooooooge fan club here.

[BernieforPres2016]

8. I alerted on that post

I compared it to an NFL defensive player knocking out an opposing player with a cheap shot and then dancing over the other player while he was unconscious.

Not that I expect that a jury will block it. It only goes in one direction.

[Bjornsdotter]

9. I have only one person

...on ignore. I'll leave it to you to guess who.

[QC]

10. It's just that she is so very, very deeply offended by bigotry!

http://www.fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=117360

[Hissyspit]

11. Ugh.

[dana_b]

28. holy crap!!

well that person hasn't blatantly come out on this site as an anti semite so they're safe but I just don't see one as being better than the other.

[Bread and Circus]

32. Well that's basically hate speech. Bookmarking.

Color me not surprised.

[stranger81]

50. I've been wondering when that gem would surface here on DU.

Kossacks found it some time ago, and have had her number ever since. More gullible people here at DU, I guess.

[QC]

63. Does Markos give her special protection? n/t

[Autumn]

64. OMG the comments.

[jillan]

62. +10000! And it's on a daily basis. It's as if they think - hmmmmm? How can I be more

vicious than I was yesterday?

Her and one other poster really pour out the hatred around here.

[Joe the Revelator]

14. It's all just a game to them. It was never about issues, its about playing a highschool popularity

game.

We're all just Gretchen Wieners.

[jalan48]

12. Just a question (and it may have already been asked).

Didn't the Daily Kos say March 15th was the day they would no longer allow anti-Hillary posts (or something akin to that)? When did this big change on DU happen? Coincidence?

[MisterP]

33. Skinner made an announcement Mar. 15 for some new rules and the infamous amnesty-for-some

they got mad that the mods wouldn't ban Sanders supporters, so they needed a trophy kill

[jalan48]

49. Same as the Daily Kos then?

[Bubzer]

60. Pretty much, yeah

[840high]

13. I will miss Willy.

[DamnYankeeInHouston]

25. He made me happy everyday.

[rhett o rick]

15. WillyT was banned because he was an outspoken progressive. He isn't and never has been racist.

Saying someone might be suffering from the "syndrome" (I'm afraid to use the name) isn't pejorative let alone racist (Patty Hearst appears to be suffering from SS). What we saw was mob rule. The Clinton supporters have long wanted him gone. All they had to do was label him a racist and scream for him to be banned.

Personally, I think it's racist to use racism as a bludgeon to try to silence those that don't follow a certain worldview. And what's ironic is that progressive have always been on the forefront in the fight for equality. Sanders is much more apt to support equality than Clinton. Heed what Black Lives Matter have to say about Clinton:

“Here's the truth: the Clinton legacy has left our prisons bursting at the seams. Real lives have been destroyed as a result. It is an indisputable fact that millions of Black people were locked up for drug crimes and provided the bodies for the expansion of the prison industry.

The 1994 Crime Bill that she so vigorously defended not only expanded incarceration, but stripped funding for college education from prisoners. The Clinton legacy allowed for policies that prevented anyone convicted of a felony drug offense from receiving food stamps or income assistance. Clinton-led welfare reform fundamentally ripped apart the social safety net.”

“Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these policies resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”

The important thing here is that as progressives or at least Democrats, we should be able to discuss these things w/o screaming racism and looking to ban people.

[Joe the Revelator]

19. There is absolutely nothing racist about the term 'Stockholm Syndrome'

[rhett o rick]

20. I agree, it isn't even pejorative.

[Joe the Revelator]

24. And I was agreeing with you :) just a rhetorical statement on how goofy stuff as gotten around here.

[amborin]

44. i was shocked and saddened that Willy T was banned; his posts were typically upbeat and incisive;

he's one of this site's most stalwart progressives; wrt the target OP, it seemed to be making an argument analogous to "What's the Matter with Kansas;" apparently, applying that argument to other races is prohibited here.

his banning won't be the first;

[rhett o rick]

45. It isn't that they've picked off the top progressives like WillyT, Manny, NYC_SKP, and L0onix,

but other great progressives have left too. Disgusted by the treatment here. Two great progressives said goodbye today and they follow a line of others. Some like sabrina1 haven't left for good but post less and less. I would ask progressive to resist confrontation (like me, lol) and keep to the progressive groups like the Sanders Group and the Populist Group. Trash those groups that have been taken over by those clearly here to do other than speak to issues. Use the ignore list feature. Don't bother with alerting, that system has been neutered as it was the only power Sanders supporters had. Don't let them bully you out.

[LiberalArkie]

48. It really isn't worth it here. If Bernie wins and loses the General. It is our fault.

If Bernie wins the primary and the general. Anything that happens is our fault.
If Hrc win the primary and is indicted and looses the general, it is our fault.
If Hrc wins the primary and looses the General. It is our fault.
If Hrc wins the primary and wins the general and something goes wrong, it is our fault.

We have no way in which the Hillary folks will let us exist here.

[rhett o rick]

54. Put them on ignore and trash their Groups and GD: P. Seriously. nm

[farleftlib]

26. I will miss WillyT very much

I think this is terrible and they're having quite a party about it in GD-P.

He was a good guy and a progressive. I've been away a few days so I don't know what he did that got him banned but WillyT is not and never has been a racist.

[guillaumeb]

27. Agreed, with reservations.

When you wrote:

It might mean that the trolls won and the member was chased away... it might mean someone overstepped the bounds of good taste.

I read the post, and I would have voted to hide. The opinion was deliberately insulting and contributed nothing to the discussion.

And when you wrote:

To others who might be more open minded, I would offer this perspective; We, as a community, failed those individuals. Whether it be that we were not able to dissuade them from trollish behavior, shelter them from swarm-alerts that would deprive them of their ability to participate, or to bolster them while under personal assault.

Every DU member chooses what to post. Each member makes a decision to write what is in the post. When I write, I try to write as if I am having a face to face talk with the audience.

I have had two posts hidden myself, one that I feel was a valid hide, one I disagree. But I do not insult other members or assume that they are stupid. We need less insults, less condescension, and more dialogue.

[Bubzer]

61. Less insults, less condescension, and more dialogue would be awesome. And fruitless.

You cannot dialogue with anyone who's simply going to twist anything you say into a caricature of misrepresentation... not and hope to achieve anything worthwhile. A solid half of the members here have chosen to eschew facts, and to kill the courier... so to speak.
We're stuck in a catch 22 which one side doesn't care to try to get out of.

[guillaumeb]

65. If I call you a name, how likely are you to listen to what I say after that?

Calling nonwhites battered wives and victims of Stockholm syndrome is no way to start a discussion. It is racist and ignorant.

[LiberalArkie]

29. How many long timers does this make

WillyT
Manny Goldstein
Loonix
NYC_Skip


Who else?


I guess I should ask Which HRC supporters have been banned?

[GreenPartyVoter]

31. Those are just the most recent ones. We have lost a lot of great progressives from this site over

the years.

[840high]

36. Too many

I miss them all. Has any one contacted them and told them about the amnesty?

[LiberalArkie]

37. From what I have heard it doesn't apply to those who were banned.

[840high]

38. Darn. So the amnesty is really

for the Clinton supporters benefit.

[LiberalArkie]

39. More or less since I can't remember one being banned. I could be wrong, but I really

can't. Timeouts yes, but not banned.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

53. yes

and it sucks

[Hydra]

59. I had hope, but it's pretty transparent now

Team Hill has been given the green light to be themselves. I asked the question yesterday whether Skinner realizes he may have killed his site- the jailbirds will try to ban all of us, and then they will stop coming here. Their job will be done.

[rhett o rick]

46. LOL, amnesty for Clinton bullies. Put them on ignore and neutralize this tactic. nm

[rhett o rick]

47. Those are just the ones banned. For every one of them 5 more have left in disgust. At least two

left today alone. Intimidation.

[riderinthestorm]

67. Gcomeau was banned today. 12 years here then got 2 hides and banned!

Not FFR'd. Banned.



Another long time Bernie DUer gone.

[cantbeserious]

34. Truly A Sad Day

eom

[Dont call me Shirley]

41. KnfreakinR!

[HassleCat]

51. It's a good indication of the direction of our party.

There is tolerance and forgiveness for some sins and some sinners, but not others. Is it any wonder our party is sinking farther and faster into minority party status?

[Mbrow]

56. Honestly I've been thinking

Of just openly telling them to cancel my account, There doesn't seem to be any way of doing it myself. Of course if i do I do it in style....

[truebluegreen]

57. I'm not going to miss Willy T

'cause I'm getting the f outta here, and going where he and the others went.

The upsides of the site (format, links to breaking news on a wide range of subjects, my favorite progressive posters--a quickly shrinking number) are outweighed by the downsides (you all know what, and who, they are). I may lurk now and then (I already let my star membership lapse) but I don't see interacting/posting.

See all y'all at JPR.

[Rebkeh]

58. for #52 above.. sigh

I am glancing at the door myself.

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Call out of DU member who is not only not participating in this thread, but has been banned from this group. This entire subthread is absolutely nothing but a series of personal attacks on a current DUer who is not allowed to respond.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 18, 2016, 08:37 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Just today a decision was made to block an offensive poster - first time ever. Let this true statement stand.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh. Both sides act like children.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There's no violation here, unless the word 'shit' is a problem. Which it isn't. Leave it.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Vicious personal attacks. Enough!