The one hour cooling off period for a hidden jury decision works really well

[itsrobert]

Just keeping it positive. Good job DU administrators.

[Duckhunter935]

1. ?

[JackRiddler]

2. How does this work?

I just got a jury call on a case that had already been decided, and ended up reversed? Are we doing appeals now?

[yeoman6987]

3. I hope so

I always thought an appeal would be helpful for a lot of us.

[JackRiddler]

6. It's too much.

People say a lot of stupid things or get into arguments, there is a flood of alerts, now it's seven jurors times two rounds = 14 where you previously had 5?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. say what? news to me.

[itsrobert]

7. Appeals would be good.

But if you get a post hidden, you are not allowed to posts in that forum for 1 hour. That's on your first hidden posts in a 90 day period.

[JackRiddler]

8. So why did I just adjudicate a second ruling...

on a post that had already been hidden?

Bug, perhaps?

[itsrobert]

9. Could be.

maybe a little data sync hiccup. Or maybe the admins are reviewing jury decision and if they feel that post didn't get a fair shake, invalidates the first results and sends it to another jury?

[LiberalAndProud]

10. I think you are mistaken.

The first jury result was cited by the alerter, asking what's the difference. It was interesting that this alert got exactly reverse numbers though.

[JackRiddler]

11. You can alert on a jury result?

How does this work? Or what do you mean by "cited"? (Are we talking about the "Bomb Iraq" thing?)

[petronius]

12. I don't know what you all are referring to specifically, but I've seen times

where someone posts the same thing twice in different places, or reposts something that was hidden. Then, the alerter on the second post refers to the hidden first post to make a case.

IOW, not a review of a post, but two juries on two different posts.

As for alerting on jury results, every DuMail has an alert button - if you get something in your mailbox that Admins should see, including jury results, you can alert on it. But they do see all juries...

[LiberalAndProud]

14. You can alert on jury results, but I think those alerts go to admins.

The jury didn't unhide a hidden post. (Yes, it is the bomb Iraq thing)

This is the post that was hidden by a different jury: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025352790

This is the post that you were jurying: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014865143#post1


As the saying goes, you take your chances.

[JackRiddler]

19. Oh, I see...

Whoever alerted copy-pasted the prior jury verdict - in a confusing manner. Which would be predictable, if someone was bekloppt enough to want to pursue such "grievances" in the first place.

[onehandle]

4. Will this affect our gungeoneer overlords?

No.

[Eleanors38]

15. Just how many groups does Bansalot want? 2? 3? 4? ...

[CreekDog]

17. how many unique posters call it "bansalot"?

so many...it seems.

[Eleanors38]

20. I'm surprised if it is called anything, given the lack of activity.

Hell, the "activists" there are not really there; spending most time in the Gungeon or in GD obsessing on guns.

[HuckleB]

13. Hmm. So, the jury system isn't working out?

Call me shocked. Too much ugliness has played out via juries that actually promote the nastiness.

I can only hope that DU administrators work to find a better solution, rather than doubling down on a clearly failed experiment.

[CreekDog]

16. one of my posts was hidden because i made a comment about a ppr'd DUer

who was called a troll by Admins.

my post was made and hidden both after the troll had been ppr'd (quinnox).

first, it was a joke, and a mild one at that, second it was lighter in tone than what the admins and many DUers said about quinnox to begin with.

the alerter was dishonest, the jury bought it.

i got my timeout.

the alerter, not so much.

juries get rolled all the time.

On Tue Jul 15, 2014, 06:01 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

well, I think we all know what this means
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=847024

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Poster mocks a DUer not even involved in the thread. This poster is known for unsubstantiated attacks, with threads from targets of his attacks in ATA. But here he's attacking a poster who hasn't even posted in the thread. That certainly qualifies as hurtful and rude. Come on, let's have some boundaries on the personal attacks.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Jul 15, 2014, 06:08 PM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Last time I checked, the DUer being mocked had his posting privileges revoked for being a troll...
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I kind of went back and forth but I'm not sure why this is supposed to be offensive.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

CONSEQUENCES OF THIS DECISION

You will no longer be able to participate in this discussion thread, and you will not be able to start a new discussion thread in this forum until 7:08 PM. This hidden post has been added to your <a href="/?com=profile&uid=126640&sub=trans">Transparency page</a>

[pintobean]

21. That sucks.

I've had several posts hidden because the alerter lied and misled.

[petronius]

23. I've been on a number of juries where it was obvious that the alerter misunderstood

what was posted, and more than a few where the alert message was clearly deceptive and devious in the framing. Anyone who agrees to serve on a jury owes it to both the alerter and the alertee to consider the post and its context thoroughly and carefully. It was a good idea of the admins to let jurors see the alerted post before reading the alert message, to get a clean initial impression...

[CreekDog]

18. your post was fair and shouldn't have been hidden

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025352790

i don't agree with your sentiment, but it was fair, especially considering the crap that doesn't get hidden around here.

but now that the Admins have hidden the "how many times" one has served on a jury, we can all be assured that no trolls ever serve on juries anymore.

[cwydro]

22. I very rarely vote to hide.

And I'm especially careful if it is a poster I don't care for.

I take the system seriously, and I wish others would too.

[femmocrat]

24. Same here.

I try to read through everything and stay objective before making a decision. I never decide based on the alerters' remarks. They are too emotionally involved most of the time.