Since I have been kicked out of the BOG and HCG...

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

Will I be kicked out of here if I don't post fawning praise of Bernie Sanders?

The BOG and HCG punts you if you breath wrong, but I don't believe that a socialist / progressive would approve of such closed door groups.


That being said, I am glad that there is another candidate for the Democratic nominations, and I only hope that more left-leaning candidates throw their hat in the ring.

[smokey nj]

1. Well we can't block anybody yet since our hosts haven't

been approved.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

3. Seriously, if this group acts like the other two I have mentioned then what difference are the

member here from there?

Criticism should be open, flames not so much.

Is that such a bad thing in a Democracy...as socialists / progressives / Democrats?

[notadmblnd]

52. these groups are for their supporters, not their detractors

How do you not understand that? If you are not a supporter, there is plenty of room to detract in GD.

Why don't you ask the admins if you can have an anti BOG or and anti HRC or anti Bernie Sanders group? Those groups could be used exclusively by those who love to piss and moan about those individuals incessantly.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

55. Showing fair criticism is not being a detractor.

[notadmblnd]

57. And it's not supportive either

see?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

58. Really? You believe that 'fair' criticism

is not being supportive?

Really?

[Skittles]

2. consider being kicked out of the Tiger Beat club a badge of honor

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

4. This is what got me punted...

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/11072119#post13


Sad commentary on the easily bruised.

[joshcryer]

7. What's wrong with echo chambers?

I don't see the problem with it. I once accidentally criticized Obama in the BOG (the post made Greatest Threads) they informed me and I self-deleted / edited. It's just about respecting the candidate / politician. I have criticisms for all the candidates / politicians.

But people really need and deserve a reprieve from GD.

What I'd like to see is crosstalk eliminated, which the Hosts should enforce in all the Democrats groups. If you talk down about Bernie Sanders in the Hillary Clinton group, for example, you get a warning. Same goes for here. (Obviously discretion would need to happen because there might be a debate or a discussion on topics the candidates care about and it might make the news, I'm talking generally hating on someone for no reason but meta talk.)

I haven't brought this up over there but I will next time I see it. The meta really needs to stay out of Democrats groups.

[smokey nj]

9. Just a reminder this is a safe haven for supporters of Bernie Sanders.

[joshcryer]

11. Thanks.

Not sure what I said that wasn't supportive. Feel free to quote specific language. It appears the OP didn't want to follow safe group standards while I clearly do.

[smokey nj]

12. He didn't indicate whether or not he's a supporter of

Bernie Sanders, I don't believe you are, so just a friendly reminder. Our hosts haven't been approved yet and there's already been one person who decided to take advantage of that. I'm not saying you will, but I wanted the reminder out there nonetheless

[joshcryer]

13. The "reminder" seems out of place.

Given that I was defending this group from a potential disruptor who was against "fawning praise" and who feared "truthful yet painful posts" would get them booted.

You chose the wrong person to "correct" since I am fully supportive of Sanders, and any questioning of that and any cliques will result in my not wanting to belong to such groups. But thanks, anyway, I am sure that will be instructive in the future.

[smokey nj]

14. It was a polite reminder, nothing more.

[joshcryer]

15. "I don't believe you are a supporter of Bernie Sanders."

No it wasn't a "polite reminder." It was a direct call out toward my support for Sanders for merely defending this group from a potential disruptor. You don't know me and you have no basis to which to judge me. It was extremely insulting.

I'll be instructed by these "polite reminders" from here on out, for sure.

[smokey nj]

16. It was a response based your posts on

GD. If I was wrong, I apologize. I've been nothing but polite to you, I expect the same courtesy.

[joshcryer]

17. What posts?

I accept your apology but I feel you have maligned me for merely being a political junkie. I have never once written anything bad about Sanders. He has my caucus vote. You will not find one post of my maligning Sanders. Not a fucking one.

I think it is unfortunate that people here are judging others from GD posts. It will be wholly unfair if the Hosts in this forum do that and to send "polite reminders" because they perceive people who just simply post their opinion outside of this forum honestly and fairly.

I don't consider it "polite" to pre-judge people defending this group. I consider it condescending at the minimum. Did you even tell the OP how their language was disruptive? Because they have all but said that they don't care about respecting Sanders.

[smokey nj]

19. I didn't malign you or attack you

and I apologize. Perhaps I have you confused with a different person. I had to defend myself from a "supporter" who used a post from a different group to smear Bernie. That happened right before I went to sleep hence my suspicion. I went to bed much too late and the alarm cats went off much too early - I need coffee. Sorry for any misunderstanding have a great day.

[joshcryer]

20. "I don't believe you are a supporter of Bernie Sanders."

Literally your words. I felt maligned. I accept any "confusion for another person." But Google is your friend. Simple use my name and sanders, and dig away, spend hours if you like, you will not find one post of mine maligning, slandering, or hating upon Sanders. I have nothing to hide.

[smokey nj]

21. Dude, I just woke up. I apologize, seriously.

I was over in GD just now and yes I was wrong. cut the girl some slack, please The cats have been fed and I'm having my coffee, I should be functioning soon.

[joshcryer]

22. No worries.

Sorry if I got too defensive. I meant no insults at all. I just felt hurt and shamed for posting here.

I still think the OP is a bit disrespectful and once you get hosts they may be worth looking at.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

39. Thanks Josh fir your concerns. Friends?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

35. Alright...

This appears to be a classic example of diverting from the discussion.

Josh made his point. So how many more times must it be made?

[A Simple Game]

56. You are a prime example of why safe havens should not be allowed on DU.

I am a strong supporter of Bernie but if you and others in this group are so sensitive as to attack a supporter then I will not stay here long. Nor would Bernie expect me to stay on such a closed group. Think of who you are representing and try to emulate him. Being close minded is not the way.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

34. I support any candidate that will talk about

the real problems facing America, and as a socialist / Progressive / Liberal I welcome Senator Sanders entrance into the race.

I am concerned that his detractors will use his age as a wedge issue.

[smokey nj]

37. That's a concern, but so far it doesn't seem the main

focus of the attacks. So far the biggest attack seems to be "Bernie's great but his supporters are mean!!!" It's still early though.

[merrily]

42. Thank you for your concern.

Was that your first comment about Bernie in this group? His age? BTW, who are you actually supporting in the primary? Sanders, Hillary, Webb or O'Malley?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

45. It isn't my first comment about Senator Sanders personally, but

it is what his detractors will probably latch onto...that and how they can swiftboat him for being a Socialist.

I'm happy he's in the race.

[earthside]

36. This sub-thread a perfect example ...

... of why these 'safe haven' groups are so undemocratic, arbitrary and illiberal.

i can accept some editorial discretion for individuals who become obsessed with posting anti-(whomever) comments in a special group, but these warnings and bannings are so, well, Tea Partyish in their character.

One would hope that the Bernie Sanders (Group) tries very hard not to be anything like the intolerant, imperious and dogmatic HRC Group.

[smokey nj]

38. What's wrong with this subthread? A misunderstanding

got resolved quickly and respectfully. The wrong party (me) apologized, the apology was accepted and we both moved on.

[earthside]

40. What's wrong?

Whether you were awake or half-awake if the suspected interloper was banned after reply #15, there would not have been a "misunderstanding" or apologies of any sort.

Precisely why these 'safe haven' groups when dogmatically administered are capricious and too authoritarian.

In the HRC Group, for instance, there is rarely an opportunity for a "misunderstanding" to even be explained.

[smokey nj]

41. josh wasn't blocked.

[merrily]

43. There are other places on the board to post criticism of Bernie. This is not one of them.

Democracy has nothing to do with it. No one is being deprived of a right to vote.

As the saying goes, there is a time and a place for everything. This is neither the time nor the place for criticism of Bernie. Save it for GD or LBN or Politics or any number of other places on the board.

[Agschmid]

49. Good point.

Some people's critiscm is other people's fact. It's a hard line to walk.

[merrily]

50. IMO, there ought to be a difference between a group and GD or there is little point to a group.

Happy to see you are a Bernie supporter, btw.

[Jamastiene]

28. Oh, but he is so DREAMY without his shirt on.

Or so I've been told. I like women. I guess that is why I don't get it, lol.

[Skittles]

59. he actually does look pretty good without a shirt

it's the I LOVE IT WHEN I WAKE UP AND OBAMA IS MY PRESIDENT crowd that I find nauseating

[daleanime]

5. Why?

What you got?

[TM99]

6. I would presume that this group

Last edited Thu Apr 30, 2015, 05:03 AM - Edit history (1)

will be a Safe Haven for Sanders supporters.

I would not expect you to lavish fawning praise to post in here, but I would also not expect you to be a shit disturber, post fawning praise about another candidate, or generally go against the TOS for the group.

I don't go into the BOG or HRC groups. Why? Because of these same ideas. I will criticize both of them in the GD or LBN forums, but as I am not a supporter of either, why post there?

Of course, I am not a host, so this is my opinion only. I like a vibrant discussion and even the occasional heated debate. And it is also nice having some places to communicate where I am with those of like mind, politic, and feeling.

[djean111]

8. This is a safe haven. Any negativity you have can be posted in GD, and, I assure you,

will be read and commented on.
I did notice that, in, say, the Warren thread, people come in and feel they must instruct Warren supporters on this or that, as if Warren supporters just needed to be set straight. That is not the purpose of a group.
Being a socialist/Progressive has nothing to do with closed door groups. I don't mind the BOG or HRC groups at all. I stay out of them, they are none of my business. Besides, the sniggering I have seen there is kinda puerile, and not worth the click, really.

[dixiegrrrrl]

10. Have you bothered to read the Statement of Purpose for this and the other groups???

This group's statement of purpose says the group is for supporters of Bernie.

The Obama group says: "to provide a haven for those members of Democratic Underground who support the president and his policies;"
which also means no shit stirring.

It pays to read the SOP of groups you post in.

[smokey nj]

18. I never got the thing with visiting groups

for candidates and issues you don't agree with.

[Agschmid]

30. It's a discussion board...

People like to discuss.

[smokey nj]

32. I'm more or less talking about the group wars that happen

here all the time. You know the ones that invariably spill over to GD. People troll safe haven's, get blocked, and then go to GD to complain. Often, the dispute has little to do with any substantive discussion of the issue, but a childish exchange of "I didn't! You did!" I find it so tiresome. I've already done high school, at 45 I'm too damed old to go through that again. I'm not innocent by any means, but I do my best to stay out of it.

[Agschmid]

33. I get that.

[merrily]

44. Please see Reply 43.

[Agschmid]

46. Can you link to it?

I browse in "mobile" and have no way to see which post is #43.

I'd have to change the URL and do some other wonky stuff.

[merrily]

48. Sure.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280398#post43

[L0oniX]

23. I would hope that legit criticism would be acceptable here.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. Sounds good to me - 'legit' being the operative word.

Bernie's support for the Israeli gov't bothers me, for instance, given their actions toward Palestinians. Unfortunately, that's something he shares with pretty much every potential candidate out there.

[Cleita]

29. I hope so too. When you kick out everyone whose not in lockstep, then

you are in opposition to what Bernie stands for. You become an exclusionary gated community and that's not democracy.

[Agschmid]

31. +1

[Orsino]

24. The Zeroth Law is not generally well understood.

If you want to play it safe, stick with the Three.

[Caretha]

25. I'm with LoOniX on this

"I would hope that legit criticism would be acceptable here."

Bernie Sanders has said, he does not believe in "dirty" campaign tactics and will not engage in them.

There is no one perfect that has ever been President or who is running for that office.

We were told to hold O'Bama's "feet to the fire", and that did no good. We are, or should I say most are now looking for a candidate that we can trust to 'say what he means, and mean what he says'.

If Bernie or supporters (me being one) cannot stand up to the fire, then we need to get the hell out of the kitchen.

I rec'd your post.

I prefer no 'shit-stirrin' but I'm always willing to listen & debate real issues.

[Jamastiene]

26. Getting kicked out of the BOG is easy.

How in the world did you manage to get kicked out of the HCG?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

51. See post #4

[merrily]

47. Safe Haven

This is a group, not a forum. Groups often serve as safe havens for members who share similar interests and viewpoints. Individuals who post messages contrary to a particular group's stated purpose can be excluded from posting in that group. For detailed information about this group and its purpose, click here.

[tularetom]

53. I still don't know what I did to get kicked out of the BOG group

I got warned twice by the HCG to clean up my act before they showed me the door.

Right now, I'm not planning to say anything to get kicked out of the BS group (he needs a middle initial in there) but if I should stray from the path, I hope those in charge will be a little more generous than those other authoritarian groups.

[MisterP]

54. there's a qualitative difference between the party's two wings: one supports a pol because

they'll push policies X, Y, and Z; the other gets louder when the pol openly denounces X, Y, and Z, points fingers at those foolish bigmouths who still want X, Y, and Z, says that the pol is in fact more for X, Y, and Z than anyone in human history (including Jesus), and eventually admits the pol could have every other person in the country executed and it wouldn't matter to them because it's just a political crush that gets stronger the less it's rewarded

so Bernie (and Dean, and Edwards) supporters *very readily* condemn the candidates when they turn coat on an issue or applaud the Gaza War or whatever: we've seen this since the 2002 primaries, since they're not personalists; and the types supporting Bernie have developed a tough skin over the past decade and a half (or longer, if they were battling Reagan), so the bar's higher than a "safe space" you get purged from for contradicting an op-ed with mere *facts*

so, hypothetically, one sticking point might be guns--but there's a difference between us Bernie Boosters trying to goad him into pointing out that *literally 90% of Americans, and 70-80% of NRA members,* have been demanding change on sales and registration since 2012, and that the issue's a wedge/distraction that even the GOP doesn't believe in any more vs. Bernie temporarily saying that GOA doesn't go far enough so as to win NH or TX or whatever