Why was this post deleted?

[Ignis]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x742943#743492

I thought the "IF/THEN" conditional was quite clear. Unless the IF X condition was met, there's no THEN Y result.

But to the broader point:

1. Why do the Admins/Mods allow a certain sub-set of posters to repeatedly accuse other DUers of being secret Republicans and/or to claim that those DUers are not Democrats?

2. Why are the above posts left to stand, while the justifiably upset responses to those accusations are quickly disappeared?

3. How is this functionally different from officially condoned harassment?

[EarlG]

1. The if/then conditional is irrelevant

The insult was clear.

Regarding your other questions, posters aren't allowed to accuse other DUers of being secret Republicans or claim that other DUers are not Democrats, and if they do this, and the moderators are made aware of it, they will delete those posts. In this particular case, however, the moderators reviewed your alert and apparently didn't notice the accusation. After reviewing it a second time, I can see the implication that was made. I've deleted the post.

[Ignis]

2. Thank you for answering part of the question, EarlG.

I'm afraid I'm simply not very good at "turning the other cheek" when confronted with posting behavior that involves accusing long-time DUers of being secret Republican moles--particularly when that behavior has been exhibited repeatedly, shows no sign of abating, and appears (at least partially) resistant to the use of the Alert function.

Is "turning the other cheek" really the only option available to DUers in this instance? I'm not a Christian--and my own game-theory preference for anonymous communications would be for the "tit for tat" strategy--but I'm willing to adopt this stance if that's a requirement to continue using DU.

[EarlG]

3. Turning the other cheek is not the only option

You could take apart someone's posts by using facts or a good argument instead of insults. Or you could use the Alert button and see if the moderators take care of the problem for you. Those are options which will not get you into trouble. But if you go around personally attacking people, you run the risk that the moderators will delete your posts.

[Ignis]

4. Let's be specific: How would you recommend I do that in this case?

I'm all in favor of logically deconstructing a ridiculous argument and feeding it back to the presenter, but how do you suggest that I present facts to rebut the frequent charges from a subset of DUers that I'm a closet Republican--without disclosing personally identifiable information like posting the minutes of our last local Democratic club meeting?

I've encountered this problem numerous times over the past few years, and the attackers are still here on DU, merrily continuing this behavior. Sometimes an Alert will remove the attacking post, but frankly, more often it does not.

I'm not asking for special treatment here; when I get mad at this trollish behavior and dare to attack back, I completely expect my post to be vaporized within seconds (and I'm rarely disappointed). But how do you suggest I respond when an Alert fails, other than "nuh UH, I'm NOT a Republican?"

Thanks in advance for the advice.