General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI just re-enabled my participation the DU jury system
You all don't know me. I rarely join in on discussions. But I do read this site. A lot!
I've been opted out of DU jury duty for a few years. But after seeing some of the disappointing jury decisions lately, particularly those involving posts that are insensitive (to say the least) to women, I'm back in.
Don't mess with the DU women. They rock!
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)I have never had any illusion that having a D after your name meant you were a fully enlightened person, many are not
racism and misogyny is quite common around here
to some degree this is expected, all white Americans by virtue of their benefiting from racism are themselves racist, myself included (and I consider myself the least racist white person I know or surely one of them)
all men in America benefit from the 2nd class status Women have suffered and to some degree still do, also
we need to grow up is all
BootinUp
(47,156 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)black list updated.
femmocrat
(28,394 posts)I have been doing about two juries per day. I wonder if we are in need of jurors?
Squinch
(50,950 posts)gwheezie
(3,580 posts)I'm pretty new here but don't mind being on a jury, I've had to opt out of any concerning gun issues as I cannot look past my own distaste for gun advocates. I tried and I just can't be objective about it.
I do think the more people who are willing to be on a jury the better.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)I think I'll follow your example and re-enable, as well. Here's to better jury decisions.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)the more folk we ("we" being all of DU) have participating honestly in the jury system ... I am convinced the better DU will be. We can shape DU and make it a more respectful (less hateful) place!
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)LiberalLoner
(9,762 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)The more voices speaking, the better things will be.
When I serve on a jury I try very hard to do the right thing ... I TRY to set aside biases, I try not to be influenced by personalities (admitting we are all biased to some degree by our life experience and perceptions) ... I dear we have folk here that do NOT try.
I am grateful that you have decided to let your voice be heard and help shape DU!!!!!
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)I am often shocked by jury decisions, and I wonder who these people are who are on the jury. Good to have you opt back in. We need you.
New Orleans Strong
(212 posts)...we are having discussions about insensitivity toward women. On Freaking DU. I despair. And Birth Control. In the supreme Court. IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 2014? I despair- And two gametes that are not attached (pregnant!) are a person, but 8 year old children who will be murdered in their own countries are not. I despair. And the 40 people who were sent back to those hell holes minus the $7,000 they paid - you BEEN to the countries, Dude? I have.?- to coyotes, oh, boy howdy! I despair.
teach1st - DO IT. And thank you -
sheshe2
(83,778 posts)niyad
(113,323 posts)EEO
(1,620 posts)The system seems to be as reliable in its equity as the Supreme Court.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)and the lack of an appeal system is the main reason I didn't like it. but I read alot I and respond. I just don't often respond to responses (ADD)
47of74
(18,470 posts)I still think there should be a mechanism for alerters to appeal a jury decision if they really disagree with it, as well as one for the person who authored the post being alerted on. Maybe build in a once per 30 day limit to appeals or some such. As an alerter I've seen obvious violations of policy get 0-6 or 0-7 votes to leave them, often with snide commentary from some jurors.
EEO
(1,620 posts)Based on decisions I have seen there is a good argument for another level of assessment based on the following three areas:
The Post: Does it truly violate the rules of the community?
The Standing of the Alerter's Complaint:Is the complainant an active participant in the thread with the flagged post and do they gain from its censorship? Is there motive and gain? Is censorship or "winning the argument" the main goal?
The Validity of the Jury's Decision: Again, based on the rules of the community, this would assess how members of the jury conducted themselves. Do their comments communicate bias or a violation of the rules of the community themselves? Is there evidence they want to censor an opinion the disagree with?
Finding fault on any of these areas can be enough to find in favor of the author of the post being alerted on. A written explanation should be mandatory on all of these areas.
teach1st
(5,935 posts)I have had the opportunity to be on a jury already, and the post in question was a women's issue. I voted with the majority, 6-1, and the majority affirmed that misogyny ain't gonna fly here.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)... DU juries have hidden threads and comments that are STUPIDLY MISCONSTRUED as offensive to women.
Only people with a good grasp of the English language, word usage, and modern American culture should be allowed to serve.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)how many people seek to tell others what they may and may not find offensive. Maybe the best thing you can do, rather than implying that women are stupid for finding something offensive, is to listen and try to understand why. Posts like this calling (well, implying, but same thing) women stupid and illiterate with a little bit of xenophobia tossed in do not help.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)And I didn't say that women are stupid.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Hmmm, there seems to be historical precedent for that.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=29826
11. No offense, but your post might explain only why rape-obsessed women are pissed off.
It appears some men don't appreciate women talking back to them.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)by making yourself available for service.
Seriously. Good for you! We need more good people on juries.