A thank you to Democratic Underground, and a plea.

[TekGryphon]

In 2002 I had just turned 18 and was an economic conservative. I was raised in an economically conservative household, which contributed to much of my beliefs, but a lot of it was my own naivety and ignorance at the time. I remember thinking how smart I was because I gathered my news from a wide variety of sources. What a joke, since most of those sources were conservative. I remember thinking how "open box" I was because I read Drudge Report. Hahaha.. oh Lord.

One thing I did like doing was visiting Democratic Underground. Not because I liked you guys, no. I hated you guys. Every time something bad happened to Democrats I remember rushing on here to read and feel smug at the gnashing of teeth.

But somewhere along the line some of the things I was reading here started to sink in. Cracks started forming and grew stronger.

I think what contributed most to those cracks was the respect for history, facts, and statistics of this community. While other conservatives in my social circles conveniently forgot the promises of the Bush Tax Cuts (higher wages, more employment, and lower deficits) I did not, because you guys reminded me. While others forgot about Social Security privatization and what it would have meant in the wake of the sub-prime mortgage collapse, you didn't let me forget. While others bought into the media bubble depiction of the Individual Mandate as a liberal idea, you reminded me of its multiple-decade history among the right. Your commitment to facts, statistics, and history gave me a clear view of how tax cuts for the wealthy motivated behaviors among business owners and CEO's that were contrary to the economic prosperity and economic mobility of this country.

For all of that and so much more, including being awakened to many social issues, I thank you.

There's a problem, though. While the Democratic Underground of those early years was not perfect, and it certainly had its fair share of posters with more enthusiasm than reason, it focused on and celebrated the factual, history-conscious, and reasonable debates. That is not what I see celebrated today.

Seemingly every day I come on DU now, the Greatest threads are singularly focused on various cliques engaged in passive aggressive bickering. Everyone seems to be either a Paulite, Obama-bot, Pony Chaser, etc, etc. I wish had a kept a list over the last couple of years, because it didn't even remotely start with the NSA issue.

I don't know how we can fix this, but I want to leave you with a thought that deeply disturbs me:

Had this been the Democratic Underground I had found when I was a young conservative. I might still be a conservative today.

That scares the shit out of me, and it should scare the shit out of you, too.

[zappaman]

1. "but I want to leave you with a thought that deeply disturbs me"

you going somewhere?

[TekGryphon]

4. Thanks for the example.

I honestly didn't think readers needed it, as it should be self explanatory, but I appreciate you doing your part to show what I'm talking about.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

95. My apologies for that dickish response from a fellow DU'er

[davidpdx]

201. I wish I could say it surprises me

But it doesn't. There's a lot of that kind of behavior on DU these days.

To the OP: I feel the same way. There are days when I think about not coming back. I like a lot of the people here, but there are those who I just can't stand.

[Link Speed]

253. That one just cannot help itself, can it not?

I'll lay down $100 on a lack of Real-Life experience and eighteen hours a day on Keyboard Duty.

[zappaman]

256. Speaking of "dickish posts"...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=298088&sub=trans

[BobbyBoring]

274. Mine too

FZ would roll over in his grave if he knew someone like that was using his name~

[zappaman]

283. One of my favorite songs

I try not to be broken hearted.

[pnwmom]

141. You're right. There's way too much of that on DU these days. n/t

[malthaussen]

197. And the first response proves your point...

I've only been on DU a couple of years (I joined shortly before DU2 changed into DU3), and I have seen the deterioration you describe even in that brief time. I don't think it is a DU-specific problem by any means. Frustration is leading to extremism hardening on both sides of the proverbial aisle. I don't see much by way of solution myself. It appears that the ruling class in this country have decided to submit democracy to a test to destruction. And capitalism with it.

-- Mal

[Rex]

96. ...

:30 sec mark

+2 points for finding Andy Kaufman.

[1monster]

250. Totally uncalled for.

I suggest that you learn the rules of debate and how to express disagreement with details supporting your views. Because you very sadly failed in your post above.

[zappaman]

251. Ask the OP why he was banned before.

Go on...I'll wait.

[1monster]

252. I don't care if or why the OP was banned before. You are the one who behaved badly in

this case, not him.

[zappaman]

255. ahhhh

I see it as a perfectly legitimate response.
It will be tough trying to sleep tonight knowing you disapprove, but I will do my best!

[1monster]

260. If the poster you are referring to was previously banned (and how the heck would you know

anyway?), then he was punished for whatever misbehaving he did and has been allowed a comeback. Until and unless he misbehaves again, he is a legitimate commentator on this forum and should be treated with the respect.

If you disagree with what he posted, tell us what you disagree with and why you do instead of being unpardonably rude.

[zappaman]

263. "unpardonably rude"

[1monster]

264. Sigh. I've seen several really good message boards ruined by those who use bad manners,

lack of courtesy, disrespect, and other such methods to belittle others, rather than offering reasoned thoughts and facts, so that their viewpoint will stand.

In the end, the last people standing on those boards were the ones using those methods, as those who believedi in thoughtful and factual debate left in disgust for greener pastures. Then the dismissers went in search of the ones who left and infiltrated the new discussion boards (on several different occassions) and followed the same pattern. Eventually, those who believed in civilized behavoir completely disbanded with a very few still in rare e-mail communication with each other.

The OP is correct. The character and flavor of this board has changed, and not for the better. I don't see DU fading away any time soon, but the disease has set in and it would take strong medicine to treat it. I don't see that happening any time soon either.

In the meantime, I doubt anything I've typed on this thread will make any kind of positive impression on you, thus, I am bowing out of further discussion with you.

[Puglover]

267. " The character and flavor of this board has changed, and not for the better. "

I can tell you weren't modding during the 2008 primaries.

[Rex]

268. Or in 2004 when Kerry got roasted.

Some of these newer posters really crack me up.

[1monster]

271. No, I've been reading since March, 2001 and have been a member since 2002.

The sad part is that the message boards I referred to in my post started this same patter in the 2000 election. Things started going bad then and got worse and worse until the message boards all went away.

If you are saying that the election season of 2008 started the change in character of DU, then maybe one should take note?

[Puglover]

276. One doesn't need to take note.

It's rather obvious. We went from a board focusing on looking outward (hating everything Bush and Cheney) to a board looking inward. First slogging through Obama and Clinton and then having a Dem. admin.

The first sort of board is easy. The second, not so much.

[Volaris]

280. Agreed. Its always an easier sell to point out the disagreement(s) we may have with others,

than it would be to do the same to ourselves. Since I've been here, I've always tried to live by the following "rules of thumb" when posting regarding issues of disagreement or contention.

1): Patience and civility are AS important as facts, along with the notion that what I believe REQUIRES an explaination (if asked), so always be able to defend WHY I think something about a particular issue/topic.

2): When a disagreement arises between what is the Liberal thing and the Democratic thing, I try to remember that this is DEMOCRATIC Underground. While I might not like it regarding the particular issue in question, it is what it is.

3): There ARE such things as Left-Libertarian-ism, AS WELL as Left-AUTHORITARIAN-ism, and political "winning" in America is historically about coalition-building.

[kestrel91316]

275. DU has become chock full of people who seem hell bent on destroying

our sense of community. Some of them have very high post counts, too (but have managed to virtually never post anything supportive of Dems or Dem policies).

Sometimes it makes me wonder what is really going on with the site owners. Are we being played?

[Fumesucker]

3. Allow me to be the first rec

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. The community has changed

in scary ways, as you noted, and as to the bickering... well, when you have true liberals (in the classic sense) and true conservatives (again in the classic sense), yes the cliques have formed.

This place is not unlike High School

We have the nerds, who have a respect for stats, charts, history, all that.

We have the jocks, and we have the popular kids, as well as the bullies. And that is just scratching the surface.

And I will be honest, this place is less and less attractive for real discussion. I keep coming for my friends... the rest... that is what ignore is for. And now I have even more of a reason to keep them there.

Oh and I hear ya, you are correct.

[TekGryphon]

14. I'm considering using ignore to knock out the passive aggressivism on both sides...

.. but the problem still remains that where we used to have literally dozens of top-notch scientific, economic, and social justice discussions every day - now we have just a handful a week.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. And you will have even less of those

It's by design I fear.

If ignore did not exist this passive aggressiveness would become open warfare...take my word on this.

[bemildred]

6. It's always been like this, that's why we have dungeons.

I'm not scared at all.

[TekGryphon]

9. It has not always been like this, not even close.

In the past the front page of DU would show the greatest news articles, often scientific discoveries and economic pieces, and would rotate regularly so that you could visit 2-3 times a day and be exposed to many new and great ideas.

Now the front page is mostly static, with a handful of good articles that remain up there for a week at a time, while the high rotation "Greatest Threads" section is almost singularly dedicated to passive aggressive clique call-outs.

[bemildred]

16. Yeah, I mean fuck, how would I know? nt

[TekGryphon]

26. Selective memory, I suppose.

You were a member here since 2002. I'm sorry that all you remember is the bickering, passive aggressive cliques.

For my part, I not only don't remember them, I don't ever remember seeing them dominating the front page.

[bemildred]

36. I come here to argue. Arguing is not bad. This is not some echo chamber.

That's all horseshit, we have dungeons and protected groups for those who wish to discuss only with those who accept their premises. And I don't get snotty with people that don't get snotty with me.

And welcome to DU, stick around.

[TekGryphon]

46. "I come here to argue"

Which is unfortunate for me and others, since we come here to see debate.

If I wanted argument I'd go to an elementary school playground.

[bemildred]

47. Arguing IS debate. nt

[bemildred]

49. And debate is arguing. What you want is civil discourse.

You won't get that on the web anywhere except in protected areas. GD is not a protected area except for our modest restrictions on flame wars.

[TekGryphon]

50. Thank you for sharing that.

It goes a long way towards helping me understand why the community has changed these past years.

I vehemently disagree with you. An argument is two sides attacking each other for their positions. A debate is two sides attacking each others' positions.

[Just Saying]

60. Amen!

An argument is two sides attacking each other for their positions. A debate is two sides attacking each others' positions.

[1StrongBlackMan]

75. Yes ...

You have exposed the "new DU" ... where an issue is posted and usually within three posts the issue no longer matters ... it's all about arguing for the seek of arguing, name-calling ... with a single theme: "I'm a REAL Democrat and you, and everyone that thinks like you, are not."

[Surya Gayatri]

295. +1,000!

"...it's all about arguing for the sake of arguing, name-calling ... with a single theme: "I'm a REAL Democrat and you, and everyone that thinks like you, are not."

In less than 30 words, you said it all, 1SBM...!

[1StrongBlackMan]

299. And the really sad part of the matter is ...

those most vocal in the argument, also argue "principle over party" and self-describe as a Democrat as their 3rd or 4th political descriptor.

[jzola]

129. It's true

I used to love the discussions. Ican hardly stand them any more.

[Fumesucker]

135. The dictionary definition of "argue" is this..

Your take on the definition is only one of five.

Not to be argumentative of course.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argue

: to give reasons for or against something : reason <argue for a new policy>

: to contend or disagree in words : dispute <argue about money>

: to give evidence of : indicate <the facts argue his innocence>

: to consider the pros and cons of : discuss <argue an issue>

: to prove or try to prove by giving reasons : maintain <asking for a chance to argue his case>

: to persuade by giving reasons : induce <couldn't argue her out of going>

[Surya Gayatri]

180. You've said it all right there, TG--civil debate has degenerated into agressive argument...

"An argument is two sides attacking each other for their positions. A debate is two sides attacking each others' positions." SG

[iamthebandfanman]

249. i disagree too.

they are not the same thing.

its a matter of one meaning calm civil discussion where knowledge is passed back and forth and the other angry/emotional confrontation .. imho

im like you, I miss the old front page.. its so boring now.. same stories every day... no fresh DU exclusive stuff like back in the day. I always check here every day out of habit.. but seeing only 1 or 2 new videos have been posted and all the articles and popular posts the same... ugh..
would be nice if we could get some folks to do regular segments... itd be super nice if we could find someone from a place like 'the nation' to do something regular ... anything would be nice

[BlueStreak]

215. Oh no it isn't.

http://vimeo.com/25921512

[orpupilofnature57]

54. +1000 !!!!

Agreeing constantly is insipid and Dangerous .

[Surya Gayatri]

179. Excellent observation, TG...

"Now the front page is mostly static, with a handful of good articles that remain up there for a week at a time, while the high rotation "Greatest Threads" section is almost singularly dedicated to passive aggressive clique call-outs." SG

[CANDO]

228. I've noticed the lack of new material also.

Thus far, I've just figured that its a post election lull. Maybe that's wrong.

You inspire hope in me that people can shed the ideological blinders and see through the fallacies they once thought were truths. I started out as a Reagan voter(2nd term) based upon youthful ignorance of most real world issues. I never considered myself a conservative at the time, though. I just considered myself to be a pragmatic Republican. The movement conservatives we see today really got going with Limbaugh's radio show in '89, I believe. Before then, either I wasn't aware of the ideological realm of politics, or just hadn't been politically educated yet.

[Fumesucker]

12. The signal to noise ratio here in GD is pathetic these days

There's a lot of deliberate repetition of things that have been beaten into a red mud puddle.

I keep reading DU these days more for the soap opera than anything else, I know there's zero chance of convincing any other posters to change their minds about anything substantial although the lurkers are sometimes persuadable.

[bemildred]

19. That's because we are important now.

I like your posts, but I have to disagree here.

[Fumesucker]

34. Disagree about what?

I can't say I've ever thought of DU as important.

[bemildred]

37. I never did either. If fact I would question the idea.

So maybe I should say: That's because we are "important".

[TekGryphon]

10. That post was, imo, a good example of the problem.

You took some ideas worth discussing (spying, economics, and foreign policy) and distilled them down into 2 word insults used to passive aggressively attack a big chunk of users on this forums.

[PowerToThePeople]

13. I will not go quietly into the night.

And, I learned how to do that from the same people I am pointing those insults at. There is no discussing with them. Trust me, we try. Read some threads. All they do is call us Paulbots. I made that reply as a snark.

[TekGryphon]

18. "There is no discussing with them."

Let's have a little challenge then, shall we?

Link me to a post or thread where you use history, facts, and possibly even statistics to represent your side of the debate on any one of those three issues (economic, spying, or foreign policy) without resorting to insults.

I'm curious whether your views that the "other side" can't be reasoned with is a reflection of reality, or a reflection of your own refusal to contribute to a reasoned discourse.

[PowerToThePeople]

23. No.

I care not to prove myself to you. I did not come to this thread to be assigned homework. Read some threads. You will see who does the attacking.

I will admit that after being attacked for a while that I may fight back, but I do not start the fights.

[TekGryphon]

24. Not much of a homework assignment.

I'm asking you to show me one post or thread on 3 massive areas of discussion where you didn't resort to name calling and, instead, contributed meaningfully to the discussion.

Don't be offended. I didn't expect you to be able to provide it, and I think you have literally hoards of company in that. That's what we all, together, need to fix.

[sabrina 1]

109. He could provide plenty of such posts, what he said was he didn't want to bother.

I can back him up on that 100%.

But, back to your question. What is YOUR position on the NSA spying programs, the secret courts, the secret warrants, secret kill lists? From the pov of the US Constitution, what do you think about 'giving up some of our rights in order to be safe'?

And welcome to DU btw ...

[fascisthunter]

281. NOPE

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. I agree with him...there is no room anymore

There used to be...

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Trust me, paulbots is mild from what they really think

[Eleanors38]

244. Visit the Gungeon, an OPEN group BTW, and Paulbots is mild stuff.

IMO, much of the coarsening of the debate stemmed from or perhaps was caused by the inclusion of all-topics-guns in GD, where that was not the case before. Once a narrative of stigma and hate was established -- with no consequence from the Jury System -- the green light was given for everything mean-spirited to be expressed in GD, and as the OP has alluded to, a new dynamic was established.

The Left, what remains of it, is completely frustrated. It is attacked by Democrats, by the MSM, made fun of, has no say at anyones table, and is no longer a viable actor in our politics.

So, we attack each other in an atmosphere where moral condemnation and moral insult is the only way to prove ones bona fides. To use a vulgar made-for-TV anallogy, a lot of folks here want to notch the grips on their Colt 45s.

[cherokeeprogressive]

8. I've been here since '05.

If this place even remotely resembled anything like an echo chamber, I'd have moved on a long time ago.

Perhaps you'd enjoy the BOG?

[TekGryphon]

11. Why do you think I would enjoy the BOG?

Is the BOG the only place where users have the intelligence and reason to discuss complex issues without resorting to insults or telling people to "go to (insert sub-forum)"? Somehow I doubt it.

[redwitch]

15. What's the BOG?

Honestly, sometimes I feel so old and out of it.

[cherokeeprogressive]

20. It's the Barack Obama Group. A "safe haven" where nary a bad word is tolerated. n/t

[bemildred]

22. Barack Obama Group, I think. War of the Insults goes on, this thread apparently not helping. nt

[darkangel218]

51. BOG is Barack Obama group

And also it means GOD in Serbian. Lol

[mimi85]

64. I enjoy the BOG

It's where I go, along with The Obama Diary.com. Granted, the sun shines off Bo's ass in that group, but sometimes that's where I need to be. A wonderful group of people and extremely uplifting. Check it out once in awhile. And please stick around. I never was a "conservative" and know in my heart I will never become one, but I do get upset with so much arguing around here over bullshit the last couple of years. Take good care. Mimi aka Jennifer

[darkangel218]

68. Lol. Im banned from there. Myself along with 91 other people

[Bobbie Jo]

99. Lol. I can't imagine why.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=286706&sub=trans

[darkangel218]

131. Lol!! so enjoy it! we wont bother you :)

[Bobbie Jo]

134. "We?"

Hell, you don't "bother" me now. I just found the utter disconnect amusing.

[darkangel218]

140. In my previous post i mentioned 91 other people are banned as well.

Disconnect much?

[Bobbie Jo]

149. ?

what?

[darkangel218]

156. The very first post you replied to!

[darkangel218]

133. And what do my hidden posts have anything to do with BOG?

The group bans anyone who even remotely questions anything related to POTUS. Its their right, but again, my hidden posts have nothing to do with that group.

How is your weekend btw?

[Bobbie Jo]

137. Probably more to do with the underlying attitude

This took 2 separate posts?

[darkangel218]

138. Lmao!!

You still haven't answered my question. What do my hidden posts have to do with being banned from that group? Do all of the other 91 members have a transparency page?
The answer is NOTHING. BOG and every other group are safe heavens for their subjects and are entitled to ban anyone who disagrees with them.

Thanks for the laugh

[Bobbie Jo]

148. No, I seriously doubt that

all of the other 91 members have a transparency page, that you do is purely a coincidence. A good portion of that number reflects banned trolls, and some are just shit stirrers.

Thank heaven for safe heavens, no?

Likewise.....thanks for the laugh.

[darkangel218]

163. " A good portion of that number reflects banned trolls"

Umm.. 5 out of 92 is a good portion in your opinion?? Lmao!!

FIY, when I got banned from there I was simply answering a latest page OP. I wasn't a member and didn't try to " stir shit".

And you still haven't answered my question. What does my transparency page have to do with BOG? I believe is the third time I'm asking. I would really apreaciate a response, otherwise your accusation is nothing more than flame bait personal attack.

[Bobbie Jo]

219. Whooosh

Let me be blunt, you have a pattern of behavior on this board that gets your posts hidden. It's no great mystery why you might be blocked from this group. You can ask 100 more times and the answer remains the same.

....and you are CERTAINLY in no position to be lecturing ANYONE about personal attacks.

Got it now?

[darkangel218]

221. No, let me be blunt. All you do is flame bait and throw personal attacks.

Look in this exchange. First you interjected into my harmless conversation with another member and posted a link to my hidden posts.

Then you attacked my way of posting, by asking if I "had to post twice" in my response.

Then you attempted to ridicule my grammar , which failed horribly, since you didn't even read the post you were replying to , apparently.

Now you tell me to " woosh ". Lol!

Projecting much???

[Bobbie Jo]

229. "harmless conversation"

Please.

Your record here speaks for itself.

[darkangel218]

224. And i wasnt lecturing anyone about anything. You started this. Did you not?

[Douglas Carpenter]

139. it's a subgroup where the truest devotees of the President meet to speak of his goodness, share

anecdotes of his kindness and reflect on his wisdom

[darkangel218]

142. Dammit! now i regret ever disagreeing with thwm!

I must beg for forgiveness, I feel left out and I'm missing so much!!

[Warpy]

25. I don't see too many of the bickering nitwits

Every site has them. Every site also has something else: the ignore feature.

Judicious use of it will preserve your sanity.

Also remember that a few of those bickering nitwits are also recovering Republicans. It will take them a while to figure out how to act in public.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. Recovering republicans... I say Conservatives, period

end of discussion.

[Andy823]

45. Interesting

So everyone who does not see things your way is a "conservative"? I guess that says a lot.

[kentuck]

28. Thank you.

For your patience.

[elfin]

29. Yes, our haven was "discovered"

By troublemakers and too many of the members bite on juicy inflammatory posts.

Also, one issue posters tend to overwhelm the site with endlessly repeated and dogmatic stances.

Nevertheless, the site is invaluable for up to date news, quirky tidbits and local news that should be national.

It also provides an outlet for those dogmatic posters I ignore. Venting can be good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Even local news that should be national

People don't get it...as to DLC and RW infiltration...absolutely

[Fumesucker]

32. The trouble with not replying to inflammatory posts is then they get accepted as true

I'm in awe of some of the more prolific posters, their dedication is awesome but if no one replies then they dominate the discussion.

[TekGryphon]

39. The DU was "discovered" over a decade ago

This cancer didn't come from outside. Many, if not most, of those I see engaging in these infantile passive aggressive clique wars are people with thousands, or tens of thousands, of posts and registration dates that go back before Obama was President.

[bemildred]

40. Cancer outside infantile passive-aggressive clique wars

Nice contribution.

[TekGryphon]

41. I hope I'm not the only one who can appreciate this irony.

[CANDO]

231. I was once attacked for only having 1300 or so posts...

even though I've got long whiskers (2002). I guess the insinuation was laziness and/or I was a long time con lurker. The secret to accruing tens of thousands of posts is tens of thousands of "kicks" and "recs", which I refuse to do. If I feel the urge to enter the discussion, I do so with something meaningful to say.

[Mojorabbit]

59. Nah, there are perhaps 10 posters here that dominate and disrupt discussion.

if you put them on ignore the place is lovely again. I do it ever so often for my sanity.

[defacto7]

91. Well I have to say

you are beginning to contradict yourself so much that for me, it's hard to know whether you are serious or not. It's not from the outside, it's from the inside by long time DUers yet it wasn't this way long ago... and you joined in April of this year? Were you shown the pizza at one time and have returned? Just been watching for a long time and decided to join? Now you seem to be one of the more distasteful of the comments to this OP.

Or maybe your just really really mad and have lost your logical train which we all do from time to time. Sorry but I see something weird going on.

Just for the record, I was with you till you started arguing with yourself.

[sabrina 1]

115. Care to link to something that illustrates what you are saying? That would be helpful.

[TekGryphon]

123. Keep an eye on the Greatest section of the Home Page

You'll notice 2 of the 5 engaged in the type of passive aggressive clique bickering I'm talking about.

Currently most are focused on the NSA, but we saw the exact same thing during the Health Care reform debate, the sequester debate, the tax cut debate, and many others.

[EDIT]

Links, since this might not make as much sense (or might make a lot more) tomorrow.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023478429
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023477642

Notice, one of those posters has been a member since 2002.

[sabrina 1]

136. I've been here for nearly nine years, so I'm familiar with the way the Greatest page works.

Of the two you linked to? One was about an issue, a very important issue as it has always been here on DU going back to when Bush began destroying the Constitution with these policies. The source linked to is a long time, well respected source.

The headline does not refer to DUers, it is a general reference to, eg, people like Cheney, Bush, Ari Fleischer, Peter King, Sarah Palin, Media people like Jeffrey Toobin and a whole host of extremist Right Wingers who are SUPPORTIVE of Bush's policies, which is what the NSA issue is all about.

There is no personal attacks or childish 'meta' in that post. It is NEWS with commentary and it is perfectly okay on any reputable site to criticize PUBLIC FIGURES like JEFFREY TOOBIN as the OP did.

So that OP has substance and a credible source and is about an ISSUE.

I would think you would have found that OP informative and interesting.

Now to the second one. I have no idea what it is meant to convey, it is a response to a few, childish people here who are solely responsible for setting a tone of bickering and name-calling. Regardless it has ZERO substance, unlike the first one.

Now, I gave you an opportunity to discuss only ISSUES in the comment you responded to, but you did not answer the questions regarding this very important issue.

I thought that is what you wanted, to discuss ISSUES, rather than PEOPLE. But it's your choice, a discussion on that issue would have nice. I prefer discussion of issues to 'meta' any day.

To each their own.

[TekGryphon]

172. Read the 3rd post of that "substantive" thread

The whole thread is like that.

Not much use posting a "substantive" thread if the entire discussion is littered with exactly what the rest of us are talking about, but which you, unfortunately, don't seem to notice.

[merrily]

196. If so, then they were posting here when you thought this was a great board.

Ten years ago, Bush was in office and there was little for Democrats to disagree about. Today, there's quite a bit for liberal Democrats and DLC or Blue Dog Democrats to disagree about. So?

[theaocp]

207. This sums up what I'm thinking

quite nicely. Thanks for that. I guess that's what comes with being in power. You have to be able to take the heat or get out of the kitchen. Some just don't like or want the heat. Well, our POTUS did tell us to hold his feet to the fire.

[merrily]

300. Posting is not holding his feet to the fire, though.

I don't think ordinary people have a prayer these days of holding a President's feet to the fire, unless maybe they are willing to vote against him for re-election. And lord only knows if even that would work in this era of funny counting.

FDR said "Make me do it." But he went ahead full bore during his first 100 days without actually waiting for people to make him do anything.

[merrily]

301. P.S. I think it's easier and vastly more preferable to control one's own reading behavior

than to try to control the posting behavior of everyone else. The latter seems somewhat immature (regardless of the chronological age of the poster) and control freak about the latter. Besides, as several posts on this thread have pointed out, his own posts do not meet the lofty standard of his opening post. He does not agree on that point, but that is not a surprise.

[hootinholler]

217. I don't see it as one issue posters

More as one or two posters posting self referential links to every topic especially when there are threads on the same topics in GD that aren't worded to their viewpoint.

[Marrah_G]

33. This needed to be said

[burnodo]

35. I would argue that this site has been largely the same since you arrived

maybe it's just you that has changed

[TekGryphon]

38. No, I completely reject that.

While my views have certainly evolved and matured over the years, there's no way we can white-wash the history of what DU was.

It was a place where you could log on 2-3 times a day and each time see a variety of new and interesting scientific, economic, and social justice stories on the front page. It was a place where the most popular threads were those discussing some new technology or exposing some corruption.

Look at the front page now. The stories you see outside of the "Greatest" section have been there for a week or more. The "Greatest" section, based on recommendations, has maybe one hot social justice item (the 11 year old girl being mocked) and one worthwhile science article (the 45+ eye one). Everything else is either a thread that was created to be a deliberate passive aggressive attack on some clique, or quickly become such within a few replies.

[burnodo]

42. In 2002 the entirety of the site was aligned against George W. Bush

DU itself has changed a LOT since then...focus forums, member purges. etc. Many smart and wonderful posters left between DU2 and DU3. The appeal of this forum has changed over the years.

(OH, by the by, the poster ASKED this question...its not "whining about DU&quot

[TekGryphon]

43. There's a lot of truth to your post, but I still remember the debates

We debated where the marginal cutoffs should be during the tax issue.
We debated the merits of investigative committees after 9/11.
We debated the long term implications of driving out the Taliban.

We had countless debates on those and many, many other issues. Nuclear energy, education reform, etc.

Yes, the site was united against Bush and, yes, there were users with more enthusiasm than reason - but it wasn't anything like it is today.

[burnodo]

44. Those debates are still happening

Just harder to find and less "sexy" than some of the other arguments.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. No, they really are not

at least not in GD, perhaps in a few of the protected forums. The reality is that this place is a shell of what it used to be... it has drifted rightward, and it will continue to be less and less attractive to free thinkers. I come here anymore for friends, not debate or even news.

I also come here any more to post Amber Alerts, and shit like that. DU used to be a place that was making a difference... not any longer. It used to be read by Congressional Staffers, that is happening less and less as well, yup, that comes from a congressional staffer.

[sabrina 1]

158. Didn't you just sign up in April? You seem like such an expert for so short a time

interacting here. It took me nearly two years to feel that free to lecture on the culture of the place. And you do seem now to be contradicting yourself, as someone else about stated.

Some of us are a bit wary of new and 'reformed' republicans who were reformed by DU no less. I've seen quite a few 'Republicans' on Dem Forums who were 'influenced' so positively by those forums it totally changed their political views. Liberals are suckers for a 'feel good' story which everyone knows.


Any reason why you waited 11 years to sign up?

And I did ask you what your opinions of the NSA spying scandal were as I thought you wanted to discuss issues.

But so far, you haven't responded so I will assume you would prefer to talk about DUers.

[HangOnKids]

165. Bazinga!

This is better than dessert!

[darkangel218]

167. .

[TekGryphon]

171. I have answered numerous attempts to peg me to "a side" of the NSA issue

I will do so again.

While I have opinions on the NSA issue I appreciate that the topic is complex enough that I don't want to take a side at this time. I will say that I am grateful for the actions of whistle-blowers, without whom we would not have the opportunity to discuss these complex issues.

As for 11 years and only 160 posts well, surprise, some people prefer to lurk. I regularly discuss progressive politics, an attending member of the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit, knocked on doors for Obama in 2012, and will knock on doors again for Elizabeth Warren if she chooses to pursue the top office.

Are those credentials enough for you?

Would you like to see my Facebook page to see if my daily posts on progressive economic and social justice issues are "Democratic" enough for you? Or have you had enough crow for one post?

[msanthrope]

199. I appreciate your posts on this thread. nt

[Rex]

242. Ask him why he got banned the first time from DU.

This one is a real hoot from the past!

[zappaman]

247. Something smells rotten.

Are we in Denmark?

[Rex]

257. Yes I believe so.

Reply #1 Best first reply EVA.

[zappaman]

258. Apparently not

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3483081

[Rex]

262. Yes you should learn the rules of debate per the OP!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)

I will let you guess as to who was the first person in this thread to bring up 'flaming'.

And for the history minded;

Evidence of debates which resulted in insults being exchanged quickly back-and-forth between two parties can be found throughout history. Arguments over the ratification of the United States Constitution were often socially and emotionally heated and intense, with many striking at one another with local newspapers. Also, such interactions have always been part of literary criticism. For example, Ralph Waldo Emerson's contempt for Jane Austen's works often extended to the author herself, with Emerson describing her as "without genius, wit, or knowledge of the world." In turn, Emerson himself was called a “hoary-headed toothless baboon" by Thomas Carlyle.[12]

[kentuck]

48. I signed on to DU about March or April of 2001...

Last edited Sat Aug 17, 2013, 11:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Very early. But I had posted under my real name for a few weeks before I signed on with the pseudonym of "kentuck". Because Skinner was looking for writers so there would be something to talk about and something to fill up the homepage. I thought I was a writer?

In the beginning, DU was an honest and passionate place. I admired how honest and truthful most people were. Of course, there were no Democrats running for President at that time. George W Bush had just commandeered the Presidency, with the help of the Supreme Court. So we were focused mainly on the fact that an election had been stolen and we did not know what to expect in the future? We had not yet been divided by Democratic primary politics. That would not come until Howard Dean jumped into the race in 2004. He was probably the favorite of most DU'ers at that time?

The thread that has held DU together all these years, in my opinion, was the search for the truth and facts, without regard to Party or ideology. That was our strength. At one time, there was a debate about whether or not it should be called "democratic" underground with a small "d"? We did not stand for Party as much as we did for the principles that our Party stood for, or was supposed to stand for? It was more a given than today.

We were called the "10%'ers" because the rest of the country seemed to support George W Bush after September of 2001? It was a tough time to try and get the word out. It was a big deal when we broke 10,000 posters for the first time. It was a celebration of sorts.

But DU changed after Obama became President. Many on DU had expectations that a lot of things would change after the disaster of a presidency under George W Bush. When it didn't happen as expected, the divisions on DU widened. And it didn't help that it was easier for trolls to hang around longer than before and to create turmoil within the partisans.

That is sort of where we are today...

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Add to that the small group of people

Who engage in cyber stalking and follow like not so loyal...they make this place not just suck, but less likely to get any real discussion. At this point I think that is their role.

[RKP5637]

57. ... my take on it too. n/t

[Rebellious Republican]

83. You are a writer!

A Damn good one at that!!!!

[kentuck]

110. Thank you RR!

As I recall, your name created quite a stir when you first signed on but the members on DU at that time accepted your ideas as valid, over what was your former affiliation. That was a daring move by you and a good move by DU to accept you.

[Rebellious Republican]

130. Thanks kentuk!

Your validation is very much appreciated old timer!

[madfloridian]

190. RR where the heck have you been? I've been watching for your posts.

A big and a big

[Rebellious Republican]

254. I have to take breaks on occasion, to keep my perspective fresh.

Back atcha MF.

[defacto7]

125. That's a great synopsis of DU history.

It's nice to read about what I missed and see why it is what it is now. Thanks for the post. I wish I had been around here then because it is difficult to read through the blur as things are now. But there are few if any better places to find news as fast and as varied as DU. I try to participate now and then and I hope I am not contributing to the clutter, but I do call a spade a spade and learn what I can in the process.

[Rex]

126. Yep. Right on the money.

nt.

[Number23]

52. I love how half the posts in this thread prove your OP to a T.

And what's really funny is that most of that is COMPLETELY unintentional.

Your points about DU being a shell of its former self is so true, as are your points about the Greatest Page being littered with single issue posters intent on not convincing anyone of anything but interested merely in insulting everyone who doesn't see every issue the exact same way that they do.

There used to be a time when posts didn't even hit the home page with less than 150 recs. Now I am routinely seeing stuff on the home page with 70, 80 recs. This place ain't what it used to be, in EVERY single measure that counts.

Had this been the Democratic Underground I had found when I was a young conservative. I might still be a conservative today.

That scares the shit out of me, and it should scare the shit out of you, too.

An excellent point. But DU's dwindling stature doesn't scare me at all. Most days, I find the hysteria to be extraordinarily comical, to be honest. If anyone should be "scared" it's the admins, but as they seem to be just as sick of most of the crap on this web site as I am (particularly the "paid shill/propagandist" bullshit that a certain faction keeps tossing around), I don't think fear is something that motivates them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. It is a shell, but as you said, it is by design

[defacto7]

151. I'm curious what you mean in saying,

"by design". It's an interesting concept but I'm not sure what it means.

[nadinbrzezinski]

218. It's the moderation

Even before juries...but juries have made it that much worst. It's gotten to the point some of us (and I am not alone) really think three times before posting an OP...and these days...I have removed them, or simply not posted them. It's not worth it.

This was a place with vibrant discussions...now it's devolved from HS to Junior High...and the facts the owners don't care...tells me this is by design.

[Kali]

279. ...

vibrant discussion - that is pretty rich coming from one who tolerates no questioning or debate whatsoever and has half the site on iggy

[zappaman]

284. !!!

[defacto7]

289. Thanks for filling me in Nadin.

I shouldn't even begin to have an opinion of how things have changed over the years since I'm just now beginning my second, but it's good to know what long timers think.

What do you think we could do from here to bring things back to vibrant discussions from the present tagging the bathroom routine? Broad question, I know.

[nadinbrzezinski]

291. I honestly don't know any more

Personally I have been attacked relentlessly since 2003, by a few posters.

So I think sooner or later we will all just go to our corners, cyber corners. It is already happening. So many of us have very long ignore lists now. This is to the point we have parallel sites on the same server.

There are people that I will never, ever remove from Ignore... period. And recently I even got better reason for that.

[Fumesucker]

157. DU is a business and has been one for a while

Controversy drives page clicks and hence revenues.

Business strategy 101, this place is the way it is because management wants it this way and they want it this way because it's more profitable.

Of course like a lot of posters, the OP doesn't respond much to those who agree with him and/or make good points but rather he responds to those who disagree and/or get personal with him.

[joshcryer]

173. Pretty much.

And the jury system removes the workload considerably.

It's a wonderful idea and could be improved exponentially (think appeals, larger juries, etc). As well as reverse ignore could be implemented. But those things would lower participation by the drama people and the dozen posts a day posters who drive traffic here.

[LondonReign2]

225. Exactly right

It seems to simply be about traffic now, hence allowing a tiny group to post dozens of repetitive OPs daily to drive clicks.

[Surya Gayatri]

193. You said it, N°23!

"I love how half the posts in this thread prove your OP to a T...
...And what's really funny is that most of that is COMPLETELY unintentional."

The tone-deafness and obliviousness are disheartening, but hardly surprising.

“O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!”
― Robert Burns

[Number23]

288. And protestations that "DU is a business" don't mean squat. The dwindling page views

as Alexa and other sources have noted repeatedly; the decreasing number of participants (as evident in the pathetic number of recs it takes to get on the home page now); and the diminished stature of this place are the result of the diminished quality of discourse that the OP mentioned and that a whole heap of people have leapt up to (unintentionally) confirm in spades.

This place is like a cartoon now. And a really badly written one too by someone doing a really bad caricature of what they consider to be the far-left fringe.

[Fumesucker]

290. There are things that could be done to improve the quality of discourse

But the managers don't do those things, which means that for whatever reason they are satisfied with the way things are here.

Bear in mind that I was the very first rec on this thread, I was not following the herd and you and I agree that the OP was making a good point.

I just checked out the top 15 political websites and just about all of them are cesspools far worse than DU, Huffpo, Drudge, Kos, Politico and so on and so on.

There's a lot more competition for clicks in political sites these days and reasonable rational discourse isn't really all that popular, just watching the Punditubbies on TV for a weekend should convince you of that.

[Surya Gayatri]

296. Word!

"...And a really badly written one too by someone doing a really bad caricature..."

Not to mention their using ever more garbled grammar and snarled syntax. Really sets this old English teacher's teeth on edge!

[RKP5637]

55. Well said, I think there are a lot of schoolyard fights on DU anymore. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

56. I guess you've forgotten the 2004 primary season.

Here's a recap:

[laundry_queen]

74. LOL

I started coming to DU in 2003 (without signing up) in the Iraq war run up. Once the primary stuff started I took a break until Kerry was picked. I only popped in a few times but that was enough, LOL. I finally registered just before the election. I still remember the hurt feelings between posters due to the '04 primaries even months after the election. Things weren't much nicer in '08.

That said, the discourse has gone off the rails here, IMO. I think we spend more time discussing people instead of ideas, and that's something that's mostly new (outside of the primaries that is). I wish we'd go back to discussing ideas - respectfully. No more invalidating or ridiculing people's ideas or thoughts. That's the other side's MO.

[defacto7]

127. hear, hear!

[Surya Gayatri]

186. +1,000!

"I wish we'd go back to discussing ideas - respectfully. No more invalidating or ridiculing people's ideas or thoughts. That's the other side's MO."

[Demo_Chris]

62. There are some very serious and troubling issues impacting our party and nation...

This is quite possibly the most revealing and dangerous time our nation has faced in the last half century. It is only natural that it is polarizing.

Personally, I am not disgusted with DU at all. Rather, I am THRILLED to see just how many people here are willing to stand up for what they believe in -- even if the opinion is not popular or goes against the party -- and I include in this people I vehemently disagree with. I don't want lockstep obedience or an echo chamber.

[darkangel218]

63. +1million!!!

[Bluenorthwest]

65. 'How Other People Dissapoint Me'-Variation Number Who's Counting?

Meta is no more. The SOP of GD claim to exclude 'whining about DU' but most of GD is just that, 'I whine because others don't agree with me' posts filled with self righteousness and venom. The hosts don't enforce the purported standards of GD, but they never have.

[Sedona]

66. Your sentiments are felt here

I've been spending less and less time at DU. Its depressing.

[hunter]

67. 90% of everything on DU has always been crud...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeons_law

If you weren't sensing the crud then, why now?

Could it be --gasp-- all that conservative or libertarian crud is resonating with you?



I guess I'm lucky. Conservative and libertarian crud has never resonated with me. I'm a flaming socialist.

If you "might still be a conservative today" then somewhere inside, you probably still are.

[TekGryphon]

70. Nope.

But thanks for providing another example.

[hunter]

106. An example of what? That 90% hasn't always been crud?

In the darkest days of the Bush Family Evil Empire there was still a lot of Right Wing Libertarian Centrist crud here.

I'm not seeing much worse and I've been here a long time, even before I signed in. (Signed in mostly because I didn't want that dailykos impostor stealing my name.)

Oh, but maybe I'm just better at ignoring the crud.

Check out my journal, critiques are welcome...

[TekGryphon]

183. Allow me to clarify:

My purpose in making this thread was to point out how the norm on DU is moving away from reasonable discourse and towards people using labels to lump anyone and everyone into stereotypical strawmen which they can attack rather than contribute anything intellectual.

"Could it be --gasp-- all that conservative or libertarian crud is resonating with you?"

You're a perfect example of everything I, and so many others, are disgusted with on this forum.

[mstinamotorcity2]

69. Du has changed in some ways.

There are still some of the same individuals who have been here for years. In 2002 we were under the Dubya/Shooter regime. the American people were not only fighting wars abroad we were fighting an economic war here at home. the good members of DU still use fact to challenge the thought process. And if you have been here at DU for a while some times you get fed up trying to explain every aspect of a comment. Especially to those who come here that believe the Repug fairy tales. Some of the things that a lot of us have learned over the years have cut so deep we are sometimes numb to the silly talk or what we sometimes consider silly talk. Meaning if you have watched republicans for over forty years lie, cheat, and steal, you wonder why everybody can't see it. America has watched the Republicans take this Country to the worst Economic disaster in our lifetime. But even after all is said and done, they still blame a President that was handed a hot Georgia mess.

We have also been infiltrated to a degree where it is almost laughable. I remember a time when a post could get heated and it would roll. Now the crybaby crew has come along and they forgot their Kleenex. Those type of ops would usually tend to be the most productive. Because that is when you get to see posters get facts to back up what they are saying. It also helps you stay in touch with diverse thinking. Extremely critical in a diverse society.

Right now to this day, we are still under most of the Bush/Cheney administration policies that the President cannot change without Congressional Solidarity to do what is really and truly in the best interest of the Country as a whole. And you hear tag statements from bully pulpit to liberal agenda to any noise that can be created about this Administration on policies and laws that will never get a certain wing of the Congress to dispel, denounce, or get rid of them. Too much money in pushing division among the Country.

[jaysunb]

84. +1 well stated. n/t

[mstinamotorcity2]

92. Thank

you.

[bemildred]

122. +1. Right on the money. nt

[90-percent]

71. Thanks Tek

I'm oblivious to the DU trends you mention, but, now that you mention it, there is a weird vibe here now a little more.

I attribute it to PTB psyops and CIA infiltrators dividing and conquering thoughtful liberal progressive leaning folks that like to mingle with their own kind on internet message boards.

I've never been compelled to ignore anybody on DU. Maybe once when I got into a spat.

I still get a lot of good info and perceptions from individual DU posts. Damn good links to news sources I consider credible.

-jim

[Mass]

72. People are not universally progressive or conservative and particularly they are not interested in

the same thing. The result is the noise we hear.

Some people are more interested in economic justice (I am one of those) and are less passionate about what is seen as "civil liberties". Others are just the opposite. And of course, some people are in arms as soon as a criticism of president Obama is levelled (something I understand given the circumstances). The problem is that some too strong defenses or attacks prevent debate as everybody is on the defensive.

Result, the people in the middle leave because the atmosphere is irrespirable. This days, as it is impossible to talk about anything else than the NSA story (and largely in terms concerning people's opinions on Snowden), people who care about economic justice leave or the threads they post sink. And we are left with two camps going after each other (and both wanting to be the good one and insulting the other camp).

The sad part here is that as progressives, we should want the government involved. This is the only way to avoid economic unfairness and alleviate poverty. However, the latest story concerning the NSA goes exactly in the opposite direction, making all of us afraid of government.

I grew up in Europe and the lack of confidence in the institution of government is shocking for me. After all, laissez-faire is the right. So, I do not really like the idea government is spying on us but I would hate to throw the baby with the bath water. We need a government and we will be better with a Democratic one, as imperfect as it is.

[calimary]

90. Good post! By 'n' large, I'm still pretty content with DU.

Yes it gets contentious here, but you deal with what you can deal with.

[liberal_at_heart]

73. I'm actually quite happy to see so many liberals willing to stand up to the DLC.

I don't advocate insulting and bullying. When that happens to me I use the trash and ignore button. But it's great to see so many not willing to just do whatever the party tells them to do anymore. I feel in control of my vote for the first time in a long time.

[840high]

78. Thank you.

[RobertEarl]

76. You are getting there

And you're still young! Good evolution you have mojoing.

So like yeah, man, everything changes, man.

You are reaching a limit on what's new? Heh, been there done that. But when something new does happen, like this old spying story finally getting some press, where is a better place to be than DU?

The economic news? Old.

Politics? Older. And seemingly more corrupt. What can we do about it? Many many stories fly through here, we all go, YUP, and then as Al gore said: Got to clear some space to fit in some more newer outrage. Ya got a solution for those facts?

A bit of advice: Never blame anyone else for your lack of anything. You want something? Make it happen. You want to see DU change? Make it happen. Be the change. You do got your mojo working. Keep it going.

So, what are ya gonna do next?

[1StrongBlackMan]

77. The majority of comments to this OP ...

would be funny; if it weren't so sad.

They demonstrate exactly what the OP calls into question ... and EVERYONE agrees; but it is EVERYONE (that doesn't think like me) else that the OP is talking about.

Apparently, DU doesn't do self-reflection.

[Rex]

79. Right on cue.

[HangOnKids]

86. With the cliques meme too!

I am just LMAO.

[Rex]

87. It is like watching a bad television program.

nt.

[Egnever]

88. You seem to have a soft spot for that one

Does it hit too close to home?

[HangOnKids]

132. No. Thanks for asking though. n/t

[delrem]

80. In 2002 I was busy realizing that Ronald Reagan wasn't the worst the GOP could throw at the world.

This was the time of the run-up to the Iraq war, soon after 9/11 when W was giddily laughing about "getting the trifecta".

To say that I was angry at americans for voting in this man is an understatement. When he was voted in again it was a denouement.
The Dems, during this period, didn't put up a fight. To be sure there were some shows, some theatrics, but the power was clearly on the side that went along with W.

During that time DU was a place where high dudgeon was rewarded, even when aimed at (let me say it at risk of being PPRed) traitorous Dems who kicked sand in the faces of "progressives".

It's more complex times now, at DU, because the Democratic Party holds executive power.

I have to respond: if DU weren't embroiled in extremely difficult disputes at this moment in history I'd be long gone. I wouldn't want to pander to some fictionally delicate "conservative" soul.

[another_liberal]

81. One hundred and fifty-eight posts since 2002? Hmmmm?

Last edited Sun Aug 18, 2013, 05:53 AM - Edit history (1)

Pardon me for "Pony Chasing," if that's what you call it, but might this be one more apologist for the NSA coming out of nowhere?

Does anyone else get the sense they are a little afraid of open forum discussion, such as that on the Democratic Underground?

[TekGryphon]

102. I will not pardon you, because you're a perfect example of the problem.

I voiced multiple examples of the types of names I see getting thrown around. "Pony Chaser" was one (as in a person never satisfied with Obama), "Obama-bot" was another (as in a person who thinks Obama can do no wrong).

A reasonable person would realize I wasn't calling our any particular person on any particular issue, but you chose to cherry pick a single example, chose to be offended, and then chose to dismiss me and everything I've said or anything I believe in by lumping me into some fantasy oppositional category.

Your post was such a perfect example of what I and others are talking about that I'd almost accuse you of being sarcastic if I didn't know better.

[another_liberal]

144. Need I tell you what you are a "perfect example" of?

Apologizing for the spooks at the NSA? You know what you are, and so does everyone else. Your purpose is as easy to understand as your cover is to see through.

[TekGryphon]

145. Then feel free to prove you're not an irrational, phantom-chasing, loon...

Go through my post history and find where I've apologized for the NSA.

You'll find I've made little to no comments on the NSA, because it's an issue I've avoided commenting on until I feel I have a good understanding of both sides.

But that won't stop you. You've already drawn your broad brush, built your straw man, and firmly clasped that tin foil hat to your head.

[another_liberal]

152. The top post of this string.

Where did you apologize for the NSA? Why in the top post of this string:

Seemingly every day I come on DU now, the Greatest threads are singularly focused on various cliques engaged in passive aggressive bickering. Everyone seems to be either a Paulite, Obama-bot, Pony Chaser, etc, etc. I wish had a kept a list over the last couple of years, because it didn't even remotely start with the NSA issue.

I consider the defense of my Constitutional right to privacy much more than mere "passive aggressive bickering." But go ahead and do your job. Unless I miss my guess, we are paying you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

188. That is not apologizing for the NSA

It does not take a side on the issue at all; it just notes that is the issue that currently most divides DU. Yes, your immediate assumption that someone who just mentions the NSA, without saying whether it's OK or not, is apologizing for it, and your decision to go on the attack and question whether they work for the government is indeed a typical symptom of the problem the OP points out - you look for something on DU to be angry about without thinking.

[another_liberal]

192. I happen to disagree . . .

The top poster spent most of his paragraph complaining about how argumentative and factional strings on DU "have become." Then he closed with a subtle allusion to that kind of thing happening often on strings dealing with the NSA. The not so hidden message being that we should all be ashamed of ourselves for not just accepting that the people spying on our electronic communications are doing what is best for the country, and for ourselves. I suspect he may have more than a casual reason for trying to influence us to be more civil and cooperative, especially toward the activities of the National Security Administration.

I have noticed a number of low-post-number individuals showing up recently who seem more directly intent on protecting our snoops, by ridiculing the work of investigative journalists, such as Glenn Greenwald. Perhaps it is only coincidence that they are suddenly showing up in such numbers, but perhaps not.


BTW: We have had our run-ins before, so I find it a little odd that you still read my posts? You are, of course, welcome to read all you want, yet they do seem to upset you so very much.

[muriel_volestrangler]

194. There is no hint of a 'hidden message' whatsoever

You seem, frankly, paranoid about this. The OP is completely neutral on the topic of the NSA. I find it ironic that you throw about "low-post-number" accusations when you're a recent arrival yourself. The OP doesn't ridicule Greenwald or other journalists at all. An awful lot of the ridiculing is done by long-established DUers.

I'm not 'upset'; I just think your posts in the thread are wrong, rude, and disruptive. Accusing people of posting here because they are government employees is disruptive; it's extremely ironic that you do it in a thread saying that the current problem on DU is that people attack eash other too much.

[another_liberal]

195. That is your opinion, sir.

You already know mine, though you do seem hell-bent on misrepresenting it for your own reasons.

[Fumesucker]

226. I was the first rec on the OP

It said something I think is true and said it well, pushed all the right buttons but the subsequent behavior of the OP in the thread has me wondering a bit about motivation.

The OP is obviously a skilled writer and excellent at riposte, you don't get that way hanging out in the lurkers' forum.

I'm not going full tinfoilhat on this, maybe a yarmulke or a beanie.

ETA: Take a look at this post before you leap too far to the defense of the OP.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3481574

[muriel_volestrangler]

243. Meh. I think the earlier thread shows they are consistent about one thing

and that is that looking for sources and facts is good thing. To show that the individual mandate was first a Heritage Foundation policy, they link to the Heritage Foundation; and Rex, rather childishly, behaved as if the act of linking to a right wing org was enough to disprove whatever was asserted. Rex was wrong about that, and TekGryphon reacted to that unfortunately, by calling him a troll. But it changes nothing about this OP; there simply is nothing in it that takes a side about the NSA. another_liberal is paranoid enough that the moment they see 'NSA' in an OP from someone they haven't recognised as 'on their side' in the NSA argument, they think it's a government employee infiltrating DU.

[another_liberal]

248. You can stop calling me "paranoid" . . .

I have seen your insults, and you can stop calling me paranoid now.

Even if you have a license to practice psychology and have discovered a new breakthrough method of diagnosing mental illness via posting boards, you are still in clear violation of DU rules to repeatedly slander me in that manner. This is my last warning.

[Rex]

259. They know everything about everything!

Besides I think previously banned posters should stay that way...but as you can see the all knowing disagrees.

[another_liberal]

266. Yeah . . .

I think this "all knowing" may have an axe to grind with me. We seem to just clash personally.

[muriel_volestrangler]

261. For no reason, you think government agents are trying to oppose your point of view

by secretly posting on this board. All it took was a mention of "NSA".

[another_liberal]

265. Like I said . . .

Stop with the "paranoid" bullshit. You are way out of line.

[Surya Gayatri]

297. And there you have it...

"...a typical symptom of the problem the OP points out - you look for something on DU to be angry about without thinking."

[HangOnKids]

147. Oh be careful he might call you names while moaning about name calling

This thread is like a really bad bodice ripping novel. Love you!

[another_liberal]

150. Just a dupe . . .

Last edited Sun Aug 18, 2013, 06:42 AM - Edit history (1)

My guess is that he is just a dupe doing a job. Would that he was serving better masters.

[HangOnKids]

166. They are all 29 on the internet! n/t

[darkangel218]

169. lmao!!!

So true!!

[NorthCarolina]

230. Sometimes, you can not only see through their "cover"

but you can also garner a pretty good idea of who the new low post count poster is with respect to their prior high post count presonna. The names change, but the content and writing style remain the same.

[another_liberal]

246. Very good point.

I admit that possibility had not occurred to me.

[Rebellious Republican]

82. Well young buck, I have been around here for a few days, and a former republican....

I am glad that those old timers were around when I came here, they were very patient with me. With out those folks I have a feeling that neither one of us would be here today. Yes, I have seen the changes here at DU over the years, some good and some not so good. Still I have many fond memories of DU days gone by.

[tiredtoo]

85. Been a member since 2009

Mostly lurk, but I do come here for help quite frequently. there are many wise people here. I supported Obama in both elections. He has disappointed me many times. does that make me a paulbot? NO, If Obama were allowed to run again I would support him again. Consider myself to be a socialist. I like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders did not like Lieberman. The arguments and name calling here do not bother me, i usually leave thread when it gets like that. For me this site still offers what I am looking for.
Thank you.

[Logical]

89. What the hell. It is a discussion board. People disagree. People feel strongly about issues. n-t

[Pretzel_Warrior]

93. Thank you for the heart felt post. I hope this thread

Isn't full of people being jerks toward your candor and your appeal to reason. Many of us see the difference in DU and are flummoxed about how to improve it.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

94. I too mostly read the information here before beginning to post.

And I was and am a centrist with a strong commitment to the social safety net and general mistrust of Wall Street and all who sail in her. That may be considered "liberal", but it wasn't 40 years ago. It's frustrating that not everybody noticed the collapse of the DJIA in 2008 would have completely sunk our economy (and the world's) had we no Social Security, Medicare, and public work force to break the fall. Why can't these social commitments be the balance for Capitalism rather than being jettisoned for want of Libertarianism?

Libertarianism is a farce IMHO, bought and paid for by the greediest of the wealthy. In 2013 it's allied with the John Birch Society. And in this capitalist society, is terribly inhumane.

[Blue_In_AK]

97. DU goes through phases.

If things were calmer in the old days (which is debatable), I think it was largely due to there being a common enemy, GWB. So even though people disagreed on a lot of stuff, there was always that glue holding the place together. Running up to the 2008 election, we had the primary wars, which were brutal. Now, since Obama is president, the sides break down to Obama/Democratic Party right-or-wrong loyalists versus the policy wonks.

Probably the best thing that could happen for DU unity would be another Republican administration that we could all hate.

[MannyGoldstein]

98. "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but

if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
- Abraham Lincoln

The quote's not perfectly applicable, but close. When Bush was in charge, we could all agree that he was wrong. When our guy's in charge, things get a little trickier and we bicker amongst ourselves.

It would be much better if we could work together as a group to get something done. I suspect that even the most bitter rivals here agree with each other on 80% of stuff, so let's find some part of that 80% and drive it.

But how to do that?

[Notafraidtoo]

100. The party is divided.

With Bush in charge it was easy for us all to rally and discuss the destruction his presidency caused, But now we have a president that is more conservative on labor,education,economic,safety net and military issues than Democrats who still yearn for the 1940-1980's left.


If this site came up during Clinton's presidency you would see much of the same things because he was also farther right than the party before 1980 on those issues.

If we discuss here how Obama is farther right on a issue than we would like you have the new Democrats or hero worshipers who don't understand what we are saying and simply think its a attack and it all goes to crap after that.

What you would like will return when there is a Republican president again, right now its the old left leaning left vs the new right leaning left.

[Safetykitten]

101. Thank you for the dinner, I had a wonderful time, well exceptthe fish was overcooked...

and the dessert, I had issues with too. So let's do this again and beforehand I will tell you how to make dinner. So we all will like it!

Scary issues aside, congrats on the big leap into real world. I am sure you are still probably having Hannity flashbacks and Fox news alert sounds, but they go away. I am glad that you made the change, of course with the DU of the past, and of course not with the DU of the present.

As a lifelong far left Democrat, I think it's charming that you have made this big decision, and then came here to tell us all about it, and then tell us all what we are doing wrong. Just a heads up, you are not a republican anymore I assume, and you do not have to read The Drudge report, but since you did , you I assume are all ok with us gays, as he is a prominent republican homosexualist.

Anyhoo, the fact that you see the nasty, icky, unpleasant things is maybe only disturbing to you, as republicans by their very nature control all information that is released to it's followers and they must abide and believe, think that episode of Star Trek where on one night the society goes ape shit, well kinda like that because that night does not exist for them, except for airport stalls and religious broadcasting parties. So it is natural for you too be out of your element.

Us Democrats? We argue. ALOT! We also have no script. We kinda have a game plan kinda, but we really go off it a lot. Currently you see us in a normal situation when the left/far left house that our party has built over the years lovingly has been sold to build a timeshare highrise. The Beverly Hillbillies are moving in, you may know them as they related to your party, the DLC is wondering how that happened. So there are bad feelings all around. It may change some things, who knows, but in the bigger picture, ideas, thought, opinions and controversy are not bad. Not here.

So have fun and we will try to make dinner the way you like it with the tater tots next time.

[TekGryphon]

103. 11 years later and from 18 to 29.

That's a long time for many people, and plenty of room to grow and evolve as a person.

Obviously you're an exception, having been perfect in every possible way from the moment of birth with never a single mistake made or incorrect opinion held.

My congratulations to you on your perfect life and your immaculate record of opinion holding.

Do you perchance have a newsletter I can subscribe to so I can hope to be as incredible of a person as you?

[Safetykitten]

104. Far from perfect. Ask anyone here, they will tell you.

[TekGryphon]

107. No one needs to tell me. I can see ugliness just fine.

Your post was disgusting and offensive and riddled with many of the exact types of problems so many are noting. Elitism, xenophobia, sterotyping, broad brushing, and just plain making shit up.

[Safetykitten]

111. Well you did say you were a conservative. I don't make up the facts, just report 'em.

[TekGryphon]

113. And now I'm a progressive, and I see that as a progressive...

... I can still be ashamed of ugly people who share my beliefs.

We are a big tent, and that tent includes people who are as offensive and disgusting in their behavior as the most rabid Tea Party member.

Thank you for the reminder in that lesson in humility.

[Safetykitten]

116. Oooohhhh, your a progressive now. I see, you said you came from an economically conservative family.

So were you republican, libertarian or couponist?

[TekGryphon]

118. I was an economic conservative when I was 18, 11 years ago.

To you that is damning and renders me a worthless member of this community.

Thankfully I don't give a damn about your opinion.

Welcome to ignore.

[questionseverything]

153. this is the right place

for economic conservatives...afterall dems are much better with the budget(we balanced it under clinton a few times) then w blew it up and now current admin is trying to fix the blow up

[TekGryphon]

105. Also, pray tell, what is "my party"?

I'd love to know, since you seem to have such a better grasp of my political, economic, and social leanings than I do.

[Safetykitten]

108. I don't know, you tell me.

[TekGryphon]

112. No. You tell me. Among the rest of your disgusting and offensive accusations...

... you said the following:

"The Beverly Hillbillies are moving in, you may know them as they related to your party"

[Safetykitten]

114. Well, my mistake, "The Beverly Pauls." By the way, is Rand really Jethro?

[TekGryphon]

117. Ahh, I see. You're suffering from the fantasy that my opinion on the NSA...

... is somehow so morally and politically contrary to yours that obviously I must still be watching Hannity and reading Drudge Report.

Despite the fact that I have never voiced an opinion on the NSA, and have chosen to not have an opinion on the NSA until I have a better understanding of the issue.

You are a perfect example of what is wrong with this place. Your post was disgusting, offensive, and completely based in a hate-filled fantasy world of your own creation. I left conservatism to get away from people like you, and I thank you again in the lesson in humility. Being progressive does not mean all the people who share my beliefs are decent folks.

I'm putting you on my ignore list. The first entry on the list, in fact. In that, I'll take the advice of others.

[Safetykitten]

120. Good for you, your first decision on a Democratic board..."lalalalalalalala" *fingers in ear*

You are following a fine tradition. At least on the DU you have that option...

[kelliekat44]

119. It does scare the shit out of me. Because where else is there to go? nt

[TekGryphon]

121. Others are suggesting that the debates are still occuring on DU, but are buried in the sub-forums..

.. I'll probably check those out, but from the few times I visited them I always felt like the activity on them was minimal. Good substance, but just not enough people to shake out the story.

[muriel_volestrangler]

189. There is some stuff in the main forums - you could use the 'keyword trash' feature to clear the view

up a bit (it's under 'My Account'). There are some informative posts on the Trans-Pacific Partnership in GD, for instance, but they are swamped in number by posts about Snowden, Greenwald or Assange.

[hunter]

124. This is an awesome thread for anyone who wants to update their "ignore" list.

[olddots]

174. exellent

I have about 4 pages of people on ignore to electronically create a small site ,people brag about how few people they ignore but I like to get out front with ignoring all the people that would ignore me .

Yup that's true aggressive pacifism .

[A Little Weird]

128. DU is still a place I get a lot of my news

There's a wide variety of stuff that I wouldn't come across any other way.

I haven't been around here as long as you, although I did lurk for a years before joining up. So I don't know about what you say regarding the changes from way back then. But I was here before DU3. In my opinion, the switch from DU2 to DU3 was one of the reasons that there seems to be more uncivil discourse these days. I can totally understand why they went to the jury system because I'm sure it was very difficult to moderate a website this big, but the juries don't provide the same level of consistency as a moderator would.

And I do think that a lot of people come here just to disrupt. I don't know how you can prevent that problem.

The arguing is daunting sometimes. I wouldn't mind debate, but I do often see the name-calling and fighting factions. As has already been mentioned, this may be because there's no common enemy like Bush to focus on anymore.

I plan to continue coming here. Hopefully we can all learn to be more respectful and kind to each other.

[pnwmom]

143. Maybe you started watching during an election season?

When the rules are supposed to keep people from denigrating Democrats who are running for office?

[Systematic Chaos]

146. Your post must have *something* going for it.

First, there's the fact that I'm in complete agreement with you.

Then, you have all these lovely high post counts who have come in here to provide examples of all the main points of your OP.

And let's not forget all the juries I've served on, or alerts I've made, which allowed blatant homophobia or other discriminatory statements to stand unpunished.

And lastly, there's the small group of other DU'ers I see on social media who have expressed that they're up-to-the-eyebrows sick of a lot of goings-on around here, and have little desire to even hang around lately.

For what little good it does, you have my rec and my sincere thanks for a great OP.

[defacto7]

154. This is a hell of a strange OP.

I agree with most of the message but there is no consistency. It's a great post, but no reason for me to believe the writer. It's one of the most contradictory displays I have seen on DU.

There are some fantastic comments though so I guess you won that battle.

[Fumesucker]

159. Yeah, I'm starting to get a slightly hinky feeling about this too

I was the first rec and yeah it's an excellent OP but after reading the thread there's something I can't quite put my finger on.

[DonRedwood]

155. I'm with you man!

This was an island of rationality when I found it.... lots of hiding trolls now, I think.

[Fumesucker]

160. I kind of think of DU as an atoll of rationality nowadays

It's funny, practically everyone is convinced there's trolls here but they diverge wildly as to who the trolls might be.

[octoberlib]

161. Why on earth would anyone on DU want to make this site more palatable

to Republicans? This is a bizarre OP.

[King_Klonopin]

162. Agreed !

I've been a regular visitor to DU since Bush v. Gore election.
You beat me to the punch, as it were, of expressing my disappointment.

I come to this site to be informed, get news that is otherwise ignored.
I come to this site to be entertained (I used to look forward to Top 10 Idiots every week!)
I come to this site to contribute, if I can.

I have been bringing up this issue with another DU-er who also agrees:

Reading threads has become ponderous. The fire-fights, the smugness ...
one has to weed through the snark and the oneupmanship of the prigs;
the pronouncements, pontifications and opinions that dominate any dialogue
and questioning; the righteous indignation (the contest of who can be most
offended by any provocative or irreverent posts) It is killing DU's sense of
inclusiveness. DU used to have a great sense of humor. Too many here take
themselves, and politics, way too seriously -- and don't like the suggestion
that a little self-reflection is needed now and then. The analogy to high
school sub-groups is spot on.

Want to see DU get ugly? Defend your right to be a Catholic, or any other
faith for that matter.

I appreciate the informative OP's of the old-timers, the occasional
viewpoint that is unconventional, and the honesty of an OP like this one.
And the jokes.

p.s. has anyone else sensed the irony dripping within this thread ??

[Surya Gayatri]

182. Well said, KK...I identify entirely with your experience of DU. n/t

[mick063]

164. There is only one guarantee about our world.

Change.

Indeed, the OP went to some length to describe his/her own personal change.


Change is universal. Change is a function of time. Change is interconnected. Change never stops happening.

Economics change. Politics change. Religions change. Social structures change. Attitudes change. Emotions change.

And yes, DU will change as well. It will reflect the collective voice of those that frequent it, at a given snapshot of time.

If one cannot accept that the universe continuously changes, one must prepare for great disappointment.

The only way that one can influence change is to participate, yet participation does not guarantee desired change. Sometimes, one must participate in a different venue, speak to a different audience, or adopt a different agenda to influence change, which in itself, is a form of change. I am very prepared to do this.

Are you?

[Skittles]

168. put the Bots on Ignore and it's more like the old DU

pro, con, etc

[SheilaT]

170. You cannot help being the age you are.

One of the annoying things about the older generation is that they always act as if you should yourself be like them. Believe me. I've been there.

Please try very hard to understand that you are who you are, and your elders will for many years to come act as if you should be like them. Don't succumb to that crap. Be yourself. Try very hard to learn from you elders, but you are still not them and not like them. You occupy your own specific location in time. Be true to yourself.

If possible, please read Generations by William Strauss and Neill Howe, which will help give you perspective on who you are and where you are in the larger scheme of things.

Take it from me, a member of the Boomer generation. I can remember very clearly when we were collectively entering the workforce and our elders told us we were lazy and unreliable. I've seen in recent years how Boomers, now in their elder years, tell the younger generations entering the workforce that they are lazy and unreliable. Excuse me? Remember when .... oh, never mind.

Anyway, I'm glad you've moved away from your youthful conservative stance. Please, no matter what your life circumstances, continue to read as much as you possibly can, from as many sources as possible. And good luck to your future.

[theHandpuppet]

175. I do think there used to be a greater number of substantive discussions on GD

Unfortunately, there are too many posters on GD these days who obviously couldn't find their way to the Lounge and treat this forum as their personal Facebook page.

[B Calm]

176. K&R

[Surya Gayatri]

177. Thanks, TG, for daring to raise your voice above the general din

to express what many discreet DUers feel about the forum these days.

Don't be cowed by the shaming and shunning that will surely emanate from certain quarters. SG

P.S. Love your personal story of political awakening.

[Egalitarian Thug]

178. K&R But fear is never the answer. Fear is for those without conscience or conviction.

People who are afraid that this might happen, or that could be, live hollow, useless lives until they ultimately face their greatest fear.

Whatever "scares the shit out of you", know with certainty that it will happen, then realize how much time you've already wasted worrying about something you can't do anything about.

The only purpose of life, is life. Enjoy it for as long as you can. If you succeed in this, you will have few regrets when it inevitably ends.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

181. Cliques and purity tests and in-group/out-group thinking are destructive. nt

[JNelson6563]

184. Well said, friend.

[OneGrassRoot]

185. Thank you, TekGryphon, and welcome...

[blkmusclmachine]

187. .

.

[merrily]

191. Are your exchanges with Safety Kitten, beginning at Reply 101,

the model to which you are asking us to aspire?

Had this been the Democratic Underground I had found when I was a young conservative. I might still be a conservative today.

That scares the shit out of me, and it should scare the shit out of you, too.

LOL, I have zero fear of dying. Why in hell would your assumption that DU would not convert you today, as it supposedly did years ago, scare the shit out of me? Besides, I never assumed that the purpose of a Democratic message board was to convert conservatives.

Sorry, dude. I find your OP to be self-important and self-righteous. And, in light of your exchanges with Safety Kitten, a bit hypocritical as well.

But, hey! When you do find a perfect message board, or at least one that meets your criteria (whatever they are), please post a link to it at DU

[Chiquitita]

198. you said it!

I've been reading DU since 2004 -- I really miss the informative and well-argued posts of a few years ago.

[TBF]

200. Your membership shows a start date of April.

Sorry but to me this just reads as a "get with the program" missive.

The democratic party needs to understand that progressives will show up and vote for the person who is likely to do the least amount of damage to the working class, but that we may not be jumping for joy over your middle-of-the-road candidate.

[darkangel218]

202. +1 million!

People aren't going to just conform, people are going to follow their hearts and their beliefs.
Trying to guilty them into getting on with the program ain't going to work.

[annabanana]

203. Dear tek...

I'm glad that you've found solid information here. It's still here, but a bit buried. This is a testament to our effectiveness. Many who's specialty is rhetoric would muddy the waters, lower the level of discussion and seek to drive out those who genuinely seek the betterment of our Country. Stick with us, use ignore, and enrich our community.

[darkangel218]

205. Umm, OP. You just called a DUer a troll only days after you joined.

And you complain that DU has changed?????

[TekGryphon]

235. I called him a troll in a direct reply to his trolling.

I didn't run onto General Discussion and make a passive aggressive thread attempting to lump him and a bunch of other people who think like him on one issue together and then attack them categorically.

Sorry to deflate your "gotcha" moment. Next time try reading the subject and you might catch the distinctions that are obvious to everyone else.

[Rex]

238. IKR!?

It is so obvious to everyone else.

[Doctor_J]

206. There is a fundamental disagreement between factions of the party

One group believes that the way to rescue the country from the Republicans is to meet them half way (which actually means 9/10ths of the way), regardless of how wacky and malignant they are, and hope that a few "moderates" reject their fascism and vote with us. They use "liberal" as an insult, just like the residents of Fox Nation and GlenBeckistan. The other group believes that the party apparatchik should move far away from the Republicans, stand firm on Social Security, Medicare (for everyone), environmental issues, public education, reproductive rights, GLBT rights, and so on. IOW, draw a very stark line between us and the Repukes, and let the voters make a decision.

You would think that this could be discussed at a high level, but seriously, when threads as idiotic as this one get a hundred recs, pretty much all is lost. Cheney has come out in favor of gay marriage (mostly because his daughter wants them). So I guess that means to the BOG that I "support Cheney".

[randr]

208. You are to be commended for your diligence

A mind that allows open discussion and freedom of information will evolve into a more empathic and compassionate view of the world. I have witnessed others, like yourself, who have opened their minds and reached their own conclusions after participation on this forum.
I agree with your current assessment of DU and I offer this possible explanation.
We all know of the tactics that the far right uses to indoctrinate and misinform. We hear their talking points each day and read their slanted opinions in every paper in every community. They are very organized in this manner and address every issue from religion to fracting. I would suggest that our community, DU, is under such attack. We have some suspicions that some may be trolling and injecting arguments just to stir the pot. Due to the open nature or our system we are not immune to the carefully crafted ideological land mines tossed into our midst and as reasoning people we are prone to debate most anything.
If what I suspect is happening here we all need to be vigilant and look further into our hearts to find and define what it means to be liberal and Democratic. Are we holding to our true principles or being led into debates that question our core beliefs in order to compromise our principles? Do we believe that war is evil? Do we believe the Earth needs our protection? Are we working for a more prosperous and enlightened future?

[TekGryphon]

210. Are the encroachers taking both sides of the issues?

Because I see both sides resorting to the exact same tactics.

[randr]

214. Perfect example

We are not here to discuss if both "sides" are equally to blame.

[TekGryphon]

237. My reply was just that. A reply.

The poster I replied to was suggesting that the behavior I, and so many others, have noticed is because of agitators encroaching on DU. I asked a serious question - are those agitators coming in and taking both sides of the issues? It's a legitimate question, because the behavior is occuring on both sides of every issue.

If you think this shit started with the NSA, you're fooling yourself. I decided to finally register around the time of the Chained CPI debate and that was just as bad as this, and I've seen the same thing over and over again in the past few years.

[Bluenorthwest]

209. I think DU functions best when members and hosts follow the admin's SOP which for GD says

no threads about DU, the faults one sees in other DUers. Meta was removed because OPs like this one cause problems around discussion of issues, and this place exists to discuss issues, NOT to discuss each other.
The list of adjectives and characterizations you, the OP, used toward others in this thread makes the OP very self contradicting. Think about being the way you want others to be rather than being the opposite. I invite all readers to look at your thread posts and the personal nature of your words toward others.

[TekGryphon]

211. Yes, I invite others to do the same.

As others have noted, the numerous times I've had to defend myself from being categorized as a "Paul-bot, NSA-apologizing, neo-conservative agitator" despite never voicing a single opinion in favor of the NSA, prove exactly the point I was trying to make in this thread.

[Bluenorthwest]

212. Except this is a post by you the very day you joined, attacking a good DUer with great venom.

"In this conversation you came off as a childish little troll who refused to contribute anything of value.

I'm putting you on ignore because I have no doubt you're just going to continue trolling for whatever perverse reasons you have."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2674994

That post was mean stuff, and well hidden by the jury. This OP is against the SOP of GD which says 'no whining about DU'. So you break the SOP in order to preach at others to be nicer, when you have been here since April and first day you went utterly savage in your exchanges. What is the basis upon which you lecture others? Certainly not your posting history. Not the name calling and adjective parade in this thread.

[TekGryphon]

233. I think my posts in that thread speak for themselves.

Thanks for providing a link to that discussion.

In hindsight that was an even better thread that it seemed at the time.

[Rex]

241. Oh thanks but I am not that great.

I just point out shit stirrers before they get a chance to start. Ask him why he was banned from DU the first time.

[Bluenorthwest]

223. I thought you might at least address the contradictory nature of your own manners and the

lecture you are delivering here to those sinners you see all around you. You have no reason at all to offer as to why YOU should be allowed to speak like that but others should obey a great civility at all times? A double standard is definitive of conservatism.

[darkangel218]

227. ....

Crickets..

[Agschmid]

232. The silence is deafening.

[TekGryphon]

234. You seem to be suffering from a bad case of false equivalency.

Hating bigots for being bigots does not make one a bigot.
Calling out a flamer for flaming does not make one a flamer.

Now, if I had run to General Discussion and made a passive aggressive post attempting to lump as many people as possible into the category that I thought that flamer fit, and then attached all kinds of other views to him and them, and then attacked them - you'd have a point.

But I didn't do that, and you don't have a point, except trying to shit on a thread.

[BlueStreak]

213. Something to remember. There is no correlation between post count and contribution/insight

Quite often there is a negative correlation.

Maybe everybody should have a quota of no more than 7 posts a week. Make sure you use your moment wisely. Do you want to use your 7 posts heckling, or would you rather use those posts bringing a fresh insight or revelation?

But there is no such limitation, ergo the hecklers rule this place.

[CrispyQ]

216. I think what you're seeing is

the Democratic wing of the party getting fed up with our votes being taken for granted. I'm tired of being told, "Who else you gonna vote for?" at election time, & then "Sit down & shut up" during policy making. Voting for the lesser of two evils is getting me exactly what I've been voting against.

I've continued to vote for democrats because they are better on social issues, but I've come to the conclusion that you can't have social justice without economic justice & on economic matters the dems serve the 1% just like the repubs do. I am now a registered Green. I live in a liberal pocket with a liberal rep. I will still vote for democrats most of the time, but I felt it was a way to send the message that I don't identify with the party platform anymore.

[TBF]

222. I have to say it is amusing to watch folks who have posted since April

and who have very low post counts lecture the long-time active DU members on how to post on the site they've kept going ...

thanks for your concern.

[Rex]

239. No no no...he is an old member that got banned.

Ask him why he got banned.

[School Teacher]

278. Goodbye DU and Thanks for Showing It's True Colors

Hi. I have been reading DU since 2001 but have only begun to post this year. But you are reminding me that it is a waste of time
as honest ideas are bullied. I will not be wasting my time here anymore. I was hear to learn and to share. But this is my last post.

[zappaman]

285. See post #1

[LaydeeBug]

236. There is a lot of BULLYING going on here at DU. It's smug and insidious

and it is BULLYING to be sure.

[mahina]

240. This is my favorite post ever.

I completely agree about the bickering; it's such a waste of time and opportunity.

Your story really moved me and I'm very happy to know you. Aloha.

[Puglover]

245. With all due respect.

Being a Democrat for me is almost as natural as being right handed. Heck I was at the Cedar Rapids airport heckling Spiro Agnew back in 1970 or so, at the ripe old age of 16.

Now of course the internets and discussion boards weren't even a twinkle in anyone's eyes at that point but I'll tell you something. No discussion board, no sniping, NOTHING would have ever steered me even close to being a Republican. Nothing.

I get it that you might not like sniping. Sometimes it bugs the shite out of me. So I go garden. Or take a walk.

So again respectfully, anyone that would let the griping and bickering on DU turn them into a batshit crazy Republican was never close to being a Democrat in the first place. Please understand I am very happy you became a liberal. But I come from a very different place.

[another_liberal]

269. Good for you, Puglover!

Excellent response. You hit the nail right on the head with this one.

[TekGryphon]

282. Sadly I didn't have that opportunity.

Growing up in a rural Eastern Shore of Maryland community my family was conservative and my family's friends were conservative.

My knowledge of Democrats before going off to college was that they were a horde of filthy communist sympathizers.

[Puglover]

286. I grew up without a Dad

(He died when I was 6) and I swear to God politics was never once mentioned at or in my house.

In her later years I realized my Mother voted Republican but she never said much.

There were 4 of us (guys) that lived close by in our neighborhood. Via Facebook I have found we all turned out to be Dems. Odd.

[stlsaxman]

270. scared the shit out of me, too... once.

been here since the beginning. comes & goes. good & bad. hither & yon. la, di & da....

y'see a whole lot of great stuff here then you don't. then you do.

Welcome to DU!

[caseymoz]

273. I doubt you'd still be a conservative.

Because things look just as bad and fragged up on the conservative side right now.

[Jamastiene]

277. To me, it looks like it is not nearly as active as it used to be.

There have always been groups of people who bicker back and forth a lot, but there were also a lot more great articles posted and a lot more threads posted. That made it so you could skip over the never ending arguments that cannot be "won."

I think it has been much slower in the last year or so. I don't know if it just appears that way to me or it really is slower, but that would explain why the few threads that do appear in the rotation on the Latest Threads page just hardly ever move any more. It just stays static for days at a time nowadays.

Before that slow down happened, I used to "lose" many links I wanted to read because they would get bumped to the second or even third page while I was reading the first one I wanted to see. I started opening links in different tabs to keep from losing them. The difference nowadays is that I still do that out of habit, but don't really need to. The Latest Page is so dead nowadays, I could just read one link at a time and go right back without having to dig and search on the second and third pages for the other things I thought would be interesting to read.

[mopinko]

287. people- it's the loss of the mods you are seeing.

i am still bound by legal agreements, but you guys have no idea.

[Dash87]

293. Hilarious thread. I give it 4.5 nachos out of 5.

Not the OP, but the fighting posters in the replies. Always good for entertainment.

[Safetykitten]

294. This is without a doubt, one of the most hilarious threads on DU in ages.

Are people that desperate? A young waif, confused by the storms of politics happens on a Democratic Board. He sees things he never has seen before. A new world of ideas has opened to him.

But he kinda thinks the place sucks, at least now. But his prose, oh the writing! I was a teenage werewolf/economic conservative, whatever the hell that is, at least in the bigger picture of what actually IS this person? No matter, we turned a person, a success story. A Lifetime movie.

But he has yet to tell us, at least from what I can see, is he a Democrat now? What are his views on things Democratic? Gays? Pro-choice? Spying? He said he was brought out of stupor on social issues by just coming here. Why not let us in on the secret?

His stylings are about in what style he wants conversations to occur here, but has a very narrow range of what is exactly he will talk about, of course on his terms.

[Dash87]

298. Directed by Steven Spielberg. Narrated by Morgan Freeman.