Why are two of our very best progressive posters, William Pitt and Kentuck, leaving?

[Elwood P Dowd]

The thread below is just too long and busy for me to waste the rest of the night sorting through it all. I have missed most of what's been happening here the past few days, so could somebody enlighten me.

TIA

[villager]

1. What? Kentuck left *too*!? When the hell did that happen?

Jesus, what's this place turning into?

[7wo7rees]

4. A mess. A sad wreck. And if you think this is bad

go check out the Octafish thread climbing close to 500 responses since Friday and the attacks being leveled in that ugly thread.

Just sad.

[villager]

5. Well, putting the finishing touches on turning an "Underground" into a center/right message board...

...will doubtless serve certain interests very well.

[AwakeAtLast]

109. You've said a mouthful

in very few words.

I am noticing, for sure.

[City Lights]

135. !

[MissDeeds]

263. You nailed it

Certain interests have helped turn DU into a center/right message board. Sad to see...

[WillyT]

268. + 1,000,000,000 What You Said !!!

Exactly !!!

Democratic Status Quoderground.

[newthinking]

277. There are still a lot of progressives here but many have been intimidated into remaining

quiet on issues that the nasty posters reside in. Works the same way in general society.

What I can't figure out is why nothing has been done about a very small number of persistently nasty posters who seem to be here to enforce narratives or are so bored out of their wits they have nothing better to do than irritate those who they disagree with?
Especially since DU does not seem to be growing using this tactic?

[zeemike]

334. I can only assume that is what the admin wants

Those small numbers are being given control for some reason.

[laundry_queen]

432. +1 nt

[MissDeeds]

467. +1,000,000 n/t

[LondonReign2]

332. Yup, and using the same center/right tactics

[Zorra]

347. The c-righties apparently drove woomewithscience off as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128028759

[villager]

389. Woo, too!?

Jesus. This place is becoming steadily less "read-worthy" all the time. Which, one assumes, is exactly what's intended.

[hifiguy]

420. That is depressing beyond words.

I was a huge fan of woo's and he inspired me to start making the occasional long, footnoted post.

Damn, this place is going straight to hell faster than I had imagined. It HAS to be by design.

[CrawlingChaos]

424. WHAT?!! Oh no...

This is horrible news. Really fucking horrible. Not surprising I guess, given what woo had to deal with here on a daily basis. One of the best DUers ever, gone. FUCK.

Off to read the linked thread...

[Maven]

377. +1000

[hifiguy]

418. You WILL "root for" the approved laundry,

policies and associations be damned.

[laundry_queen]

431. Bingo.

Once upon a time, I used to come to DU for thoughtful discussion, insight and analysis you couldn't get anywhere else on the net. DU was always years ahead on news stories. Years.

Now it's nothing more than a yahoo board full of gossip about recent fluff stories, with rules against some right wing views. I myself have been thinking about leaving for a long time now. I haven't, but I only pop in mostly to visit the Canada board, the rest I might have a look as a rubbernecker, but that's about it.

[90-percent]

123. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7005752

I think this is the ugly thread you are referring to? Octafish is a magnificent beautiful and deeply patriotic DU member. His contributions and research work are of extreme value for those that strive to be well informed.

It boils down to simple bullying. And I enjoy a healthy debate with all internet bullies and I always engage with respect, as "the other side" is as passionate about their beliefs as I am about mine. It does get tiring fighting the same battles over and over again for decades, but the price of Democracy is eternal vigilance. And as my hero Frank Zappa has said, it's impossible to change somebodies mind. They will agree with you only if they already agree with you.

But on facebook, mostly, if I see something egregious and flat out wrong, I will not let it stand without offering a significant opposing viewpoint. And I never do personal attacks or loose my temper. I respond to conservative thread on FB bitching about liberals and often my post ends the discussion entirely. No comebacks or attacks. I posted my viewpoints on Senator Chris Murphy's FB about the Iran nuke deal yesterday, and I'm still the last post out of maybe 450 as of this morning. (If I got that right)

Bernie responds like that, too. He's always respectful to his opposition and doesn't do personal attacks and sticks to his issues. The recent MTP is an example of Bernie in action. I think there's some Ghandi channeling going on with this method, which I consider the most effective in moving the ball down the field.

-90% Jimmy

[BlueJazz]

276. Maybe I should quit calling everybody "Sewer Rats"

Seriously ..Great post !!

[merrily]

133. The Octafish appreciation thread also turned into a sewer?

I'm not sure I even want to see that.

[polly7]

140. Octafish threads always turn into sewers.

His/her? fan club seems to hate all the truth and information posted - they try everything to derail, insult, mock - like a pack of super-hungry hyenas.

Why do hyenas hate progressive posters and info?

[merrily]

143. Are you saying fans of Octafish are hyenas?

I posted on the thread early on, when it was just some compliments and +1s.

[polly7]

149. No, by 'fans', i mean those that follow from thread to thread derailing

all that information posted with the usual garbage, personal crap. It's disgusting to watch.

[merrily]

154. Ah, stalking trolls or trolling stalkers. Take your pick.

I've never had a problem with Octafish. Even helped me out with some info when I asked a question.

[polly7]

156. Octafish is a treasure here.

I'm always amazed at all the information he/she? posts, I could spend happy hours reading it all.

[blm]

229. Octafish and I insisted on keeping the Bush's truth posted on DU since the early days.

Derision for that has increased in recent years, with Octafish taking the brunt of it, while I have been dealing with health issues.

Octafish is a TRUE PATRIOT in every sense of the word.

[villager]

238. They don't like to be discomfited because they are, at core, apologists for the status quo

n/t

[emsimon33]

501. Colbert: "Truth has a liberal bias."

I have served on too many juries recently where the alert was meant to silence the poster. Many people have complained to Skinner, so I have been told, regarding the DUers who troll DU looking to alert of DUers whom they do not like. It is a real shame that we are losing some of the best.

[Godhumor]

24. The place is exactly the same. Communities lose and gain members all the time

And, considering his history with both voluntary and involuntary exits, I am sure Pitt will be back in due time.

[DrDan]

75. this place is NOTHING like when I joined in 2001

the rancor, bitterness, and insulting-nature of posts made a significant turn for the worse several years ago.

[Godhumor]

79. The community grew. Very quickly.

I've been around since 2001, as a lurker originally, as well. Every once in awhile we get one of those "What is this place coming to" things around a high profile exit or banning. We also have periodic wonderings about the quality of influxes of new members during presidential election times.

As far as I can see, we're following the same pattern as always.

[awoke_in_2003]

408. "The community grew. Very quickly"

Especially after Rush launched Operation Chaos during the 08 primaries. We have had a large influx of people who know exactly where the line is and constantly run right up to it, but never over. They are doing the same thing now they did in 08- turning dems against dems.

[Godhumor]

412. Nah, don't buy it

I would venture to guess the percentage of trolls to real members has always been about the same. In-fighting for supported candidates is seen on every political discussion board, including FR, and they're generally commenced by earnest supporters of those candidates.

Sure there are disruptors who stick around far too long, but that is also present in an virtual community.

TLDR version, I buy Operation Chaos disrupted DU about as much as I buy the Anonymous is the only reason the election want stolen in 2012, which is not very much.

[Skittles]

413. I remember a better DU too

before all the swooners and alert trolls - the fucking ASSHOLES I refer to - no, it's nothing like it was

[Horse with no Name]

425. Me too. n/t

[laundry_queen]

433. it's very different now

anyone who says it's not different had cranio-rectal inversion during that time period (or maybe currently), or are just gaslighting.

[OhioChick]

483. No, it certainly isn't the same DU n/t

[SidDithers]

102. DU today is what we made it...

Behaviour at DU2 (and DU1) was ultimately guided by the involvement of the Admins, whether directly or through instructions to the mods.

Behaviour at DU3 is completely guided by us, the users. If DU is nastier, more rancorous and more bitter than it was, it's because we've allowed it to become that way, by continuing to not hide nastiness, rancor and bitterness.

That toothpaste is out of the tube, and I don't know if there's a way to get it back in.

Sid

[HFRN]

103. ...

hfrn

[Gormy Cuss]

111. Behavior at DU3 is unguided, with the exception of the trolling-quashing by MIRT

and the occasional ban hammer by admins.


Juries can not set community standards, juries can only return a straw vote on a post highlighted by the alerter.

[greytdemocrat]

130. The simple truth.

[merrily]

141. Agree to a point. However, hiding a post, in and of itself, doesn't do much when any member can

unhide it. Hiding a post only makes the board look nicer to non-members. The penalty for frivolous alerts is too lenient in my opinion. Can't hide for a day? PM a friend. Done.

And jurors seem to think their only function is to vote to leave and occasionally add "discuss," no matter how RW or nasty a post is.

[Generic Other]

239. You would certainly know

[SidDithers]

243. As would you...nt

Sid

[Generic Other]

308. Speak for yourself

I object to the royal perogative "we" when you mean "you."

[SidDithers]

315. I just did...nt

Sid

[JEB]

258. Is that toothpaste?

[Agschmid]

329. Yes, invigorating mint, if I'm not mistaken?

[Cleita]

260. What happened is the bullies have taken over now that there are no mods to keep them

civil. In other words, DU3 put the foxes in the hen house and they won't stop until the last chicken is dead. When that happens and they finally own the henhouse, they will get hungry and go in search of another henhouse, but this one will be abandoned except by a few rats and mice that will take up residence.

[-none]

313. ^^^This^^^

And it has been going on for quite some time.
Most here know who the usual suspect here are.

[Horse with no Name]

427. You've always been one of my favorites. Spot on. n/t

[emsimon33]

502. and roaches (unless they take the roaches with them)

[R B Garr]

303. +1000. And some go to ghoulish lengths to make things personal just

to get posts hidden. I still miss one long-term member, The Magistrate, who was told to go take a nap by someone on this very thread (edit-now with 2 posts hidden already from personal attacks in this thread) when he was correcting one of the many bizarre conspiracy theories. I miss him. He was brilliant, and I loved his writing.

That was when I used to come here more in a read-only mode, but I noticed old vendettas and thread stalkers harassing people I liked. I appreciate your input, Sid Dithers of DU , because it has helped me see who to take seriously and who to disregard.

The conspiracy theories really dumb this place down. For people who like to spend more time reading than commenting, it's a waste of time to read through someone's vendettas from years ago, general rudeness, and then the ridiculous conspiracy theories. Your smilies and comments have been a great source for me.

[MADem]

345. I miss The Magistrate terribly as well--smart as a whip, entertaining as hell, and NICE.

Never saw a LOOK AT ME/GBCW post from him, either.

I hope he's OK.

I wish he'd return.

I, too, have little patience for conspiracy theories and half-baked websites. "Consortium News" is close to the top of the "Stupid Websites to Avoid" list.

[Maven]

378. Oh, the irony. nt

[stevenleser]

473. I don't think there is anything ironic about it. DU3 has allowed everyone's worst impulses to be on

display, no side or faction is immune or can say they are the holy ones, even if one side or another in a particular dispute may not be "as bad" as the other. And we all have our opinions on who that is.

[awoke_in_2003]

410. And a big problem with the hides...

are that you just have to make on click and you can read what was said. Hiding is about as effective as a judge instructing a jury to disregard the last statement. The damage is there and can't really be undone.

[stevenleser]

476. And it is pretty much EXACTLY what I feared back when DU3 started and it was explained.

And the problems are many starting with, most baiting comments against Jews, Women, LGBT, African Americans, etc. are not hidden. I hope it's because the vast majority of folks weren't familiar enough with the concept of baiting and the various kinds of slurs and hidden meanings to understand what they are adjudicating, but I am sure some of the non-hides are latent (or not so latent) bigotry too.

I know that LGBT in particular did not find the Mod system to be fair to them, but that could have been fixed. I am not seeing a whole lot of activity in the LGBT group so its not like the jury system is seen to be paradise for LGBT. Anyone feel free to jump in if they think I am wrong. The difference is, there is no fixing the jury system to account for this.

And besides the bigotry and baiting of discriminated against groups, we have the general nastiness that goes on everyday that the Mods would stop before it got too far. Now many arguments escalate to the point that people on both sides become very nasty and virtually no one is immune and I count myself in that.

If it wouldnt be locked as META, I wonder if a poll was put up what DUers would opt for if they had the chance to make a choice, the Mod system or the jury system.

[SidDithers]

478. I think the jury system could have / could still work...

if it was accompanied by a clear set of rules to be enforced.

Juries in real life determine whether someone has or has not broken a specific law.

Juries at DU deliberate on whether a post is acceptable based on a purely subjective interpretation of what a community standard is.

I came across this post from Skinner the other day, from DU2.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8603151

I wonder, if juries were asked to evaluate a post against an objective set of rules, whether they'd be more likely to hide incivility.



Sid

[stevenleser]

479. It would require admins periodically reviewing jury decisions vs those rules and eliminating those

jurors from the jury pool who don't adjudicate based on those rules.

It could work, but in a sense, that would be the mod system with an expanded pool of mods. The mod system, in terms of how it seemed to me as a regular user, was basically Admins directing a group to hide based on certain specific criteria with a little room for judgement calls but essentially admin driven rules.

I think the switch to juries was done for two reasons.

#1 - Philosophy. I think that the idea of community/bottom-up policing and getting away from a central authority is a general desire for folks on the political left. I think Skinner and the rest of the admins wanted to do what they did from this philosophical perspective. I've always been wary of how such things would actually work in practice and what has happened here has not done anything to lessen that, if anything the jury system here and the failure of OWS to achieve what it really could have achieved has completely soured me on leaderless/community policing philosophy.

#2 - Sanity saver. I don't think Skinner and EarlG had any personal time left because of the demands the mod system put on them. I think they wanted to have a life again and this did it for them.

That #2 would be somewhat negated if the admins involved themselves more closely in the jury system.

[KittyWampus]

144. Yes, it is. I've been here since the beginning. What's changed is probably your tolerance.

DU was never some Progressive fairyland where everyone got along and posted nothing but insightful pearls of wisdom.

See- the fighting over Nader after Bush stole the election.

I have written this as an OP several times over the years.

The reason you think it's changed is because when you first started here, you were so glad to find a place to converse with other Lefties you just enjoyed it and tolerated others who might have a varying opinion.

Over the years though, people get used to certain other posters who most closely share their viewpoints and seek them out. DU comes to be a "fix" of self validation and as that loop gets ever stronger people's tolerance of differing viewpoints gets less and less.

And I have to note- in that other thread a poster who called BLM activists "race naggers" was bemoaning how things have changed on DU too. My point isn't to cast aspersions. My meaning is, DU is what each poster makes it.

[Android3.14]

164. There it is

Thanks for one of those "insightful pearls of wisdom".

[Zorra]

189. The increase of posters with the unpleasant ability to

lie shamelessly in order to derail conversations and/or slander other posters is another reason people are leaving, It is a notable characteristic of the Third Way, and there were only a few of these Third Way type of posters here in the early years of DU.

[JEB]

297. That pretty well sums up what I see. nt

[hifiguy]

421. This

There are some other purely agenda-driven people who should have been PPRd a long, long time ago. Some were even caught using sock puppets, but were inexplicably allowed to return. That is shameful and purely on the admins.

[MADem]

428. In the early years of DU, most of the people here were angry supporters of Gore-Lieberman.

We signed up here and felt that we were robbed by George W. Bush and his henchman Cheney.

I showed up on the second day, and the site was very glitchy. I kept coming back anyway. I hardly posted at all in the early years (I had a hard job with long hours) but I read a lot -- and most of the people posting weren't looking to burn down the Democratic Party--they were looking to support Democrats. Nowadays, it's like you're IMPOSING to ask a DUer to vote for a Democrat.

I lost my original sign - in when I no longer had access to my old computer or my original email address. I had to start up a new account, but I've been here since day 2 or so. This place has changed a lot, from a site where most people liked Democrats, to a place where people are vicious towards them and demand bullshit "purity tests"--like they expect a guy like Jon Tester to be to the left of Alan Grayson, and they'll finger wag at him if he DARES to put the wishes of his constituents ahead of their attitude that he should be more liberal than the population of his state--it's absurd, much of that stuff.

[steve2470]

435. +1 nt

[treestar]

471. +1

It has gotten to be that it's almost wrong to support Democrats!

[Bobbie Jo]

219. Well said...

Add to that...

Some of the folks complaining the loudest about the mean spirited, bully behavior never seem to put themselves in that category. Some of these posters are about as rude and catty as they come.

Fascinating....

[Andy823]

273. Exactly nt

[Orrex]

237. Wow.

That was a terrific post!

[dbackjon]

400. It was certainly not progressive during the great gay purge of 2009

[SusanCalvin]

407. Yep. nt

[LiberalAndProud]

450. This thread has me in stitches, Kitty.

In the early days, when I lurked occasionally I was too intimidated to post, because I think every OP was started by one or two posters.

When I signed up in 2004 there were many posters bemoaning how DU had changed so much since those early days. Sometime around then, the Lounge was blowing up with long time posters having become too familiar, so follows contempt. The clique wars were born.

I believe it's very much the same as it was when I joined. And the people who disagree on favorite posters agree that we should bemoan the changing nature of DU.

Anyhow, I appreciate that you and I share much the same view here, and thought I'd just say so.

[Arugula Latte]

322. Well, in some ways it's understandable. We were all united against Bushco --

when that changed, so did DU.

[LiberalAndProud]

444. Well, yes. Except I remember endless flamefests following Kerry's loss

because some chose to blame teh gays.

Ah yes, back in the good ol' days. And those fests cost us really interesting posters too. DU is just a corner of the internet, prone to the ways of the internet, imho.

[Fearless]

458. I remember such things back as far as a decade ago myself

I'd contend they were more plentiful then than now. By no means do I say it's perfect now.

[merrily]

146. It's not even the same since I joined, which was not that many years ago.

With 3600 posts since 2004, maybe you have not been interacting with other posters on the board often enough to see the change as clearly as more frequent posters.

[liberal N proud]

182. Much has been lost in this forum since 2004

There is much more vitriol then ever. At one time, if you couldn't back up what you posted with facts, your post would get removed or the members of this forum would make sure you were set straight. You didn't post it unless it was true!

And there was much less, of my way or the highway mentality. If I don't agree with who you are backing, then I need to shut up and walk away and not bombard you with reasons you are wrong. There are too many here that can't do that anymore.

DU is not what it was in 2004!

[MBS]

240. You put your finger on it.

One of my favorite DUers, ProSense, always always provided fact-based links to support her POV, and she responded with, well, good sense (her screen name was well chosen) and facts in her responses to others. And she's another one who's absented herself from DU recently. : (

[Control-Z]

350. She was bullied for her thorough research

and back up links. I always found that sad.

[MBS]

360. Me, too - but even more:

. . not only sad, but also unfair and ridiculous and sadly revealing of the bullies themselves. And no help to intelligent conversation in this website.
I miss ProSense's informed and intelligent and calmly reasoned posts.

[Caretha]

437. Let's not re-write history

ProSense, did nothing but copy and paste links, a huge amount of them linking back to her/his links....She/he very very seldom added commentary...it was like ProSense had a group of minions adding links and links and links to some incredible non-ending data base. I once did a count on her/his posts and they amounted to a new post every three minutes in a 3 week time span and it was around the clock for 24 hours...sometimes the longest interval between posts being 2 to 2 1/2 hours. How is that even possible for one human being?

IT"S NOT

That's not a person, that's a group of persons....that some one with more time than the universe grants anyone.

Anyway, thanks for playing and quit making up shit.

[Control-Z]

443. Don't accuse me of making up shit.

Carthage, you are one very rude person. Don't you dare speak to me that way again.

[Caretha]

445. Of course not

perhaps you are not "making up shit"...perhaps you just don't know

It's one or the other, sorry I jumped to conclusions.

[JTFrog]

485. +1 n/t

[Marrah_G]

465. yup

Had that one on ignore for like 7+ years. I didn't even know she wasn't here anymore.

[JTFrog]

484. You are the one making shit up.

That's not a person, that's a group of persons....

That's some mighty big accusations against a DUer who's been a member here for almost 10 years. Sure, she really upset people with her constant posting of and linking to facts and debunking propaganda. So much so that they have to go out of their way to make shit up about her.

Pretty damn rude.

[Maven]

383. She often linked to her own posts or to material that actually provided little support

for her proposition.

But by drowning her 'opponents' in blue links she convinced some that her POVs (which invariably stuck to the circle-D party line) were well supported.

I suspect she took another job and that's why she isn't posting here anymore.

[Capt. Obvious]

472. +1

[MADem]

429. I miss her--her links were good; I learned a lot from them. nt

[MBS]

452. Thank you.

And in answer to one of the people farther up on this little subthread: yes, she is one person, and a thoughtful and knowledgeable person. I've met her in person.

[MADem]

453. I knew she was one person--those aspersions about her being a paid poster or a bot or

an aggregate were just cruel, shitty, mean things, that cruel, shitty, mean people say when they can't respond to the substance of the argument. And she had her shit together.

I hope she comes back. She's one who didn't GBCW and look for attention--she just faded into the mist. If we are lucky we will see her again....

[MBS]

464. Yes to everything you said! n/t

[GitRDun]

253. I have not been here that long

but I wonder if what you are feeling is reflective of just DU or society as a whole.

IMO, there are a number of forces that have converged that contribute to the problem.

We elected our first black President. I thought we would see less racial tension as a result. Instead, my observation is we've seen the exact opposite. White people whether consciously or unconsciously (take your pick), striving to cling to white institutional power. Voter ID laws, etc. There's a long list.

The emergence of computers, smart phones, etc. as a primary source of communication has pulled us away from as much human contact. Many people will say things electronically they would never say if the other person was in the room with them.

Lastly, the pervasive use of social media provides a basis for many to ASSUME they know a lot more about others than they really do. We are all much deeper than our FB page or our latest tweet, instagram, etc.

IMO, you reduce human contact, provide a basis that can allow people to make assumptions about each other, throw in some very real racial tension and economic inequality we have not seen since the 1920's, you have a recipe for people to treat each other badly.

It's not DU, IMO, it's everywhere.

[MBS]

361. Very good points.

This makes sense to me: I think that people are anxious all around.. . and fear and anxiety tends to bring out our lesser selves.
When Pres. Obama referred to American society in a recent speech (I think it was his South Carolina eulogy, but I could be wrong) as "raucous" , he was, if anything, understating the case.

[HuckleB]

487. No, it's not.

Evidence used to matter far more. Now it's almost solely about preconceived perceptions, and evidence and science are left to the wayside. It will only get worse, as has been happening for years.

[sgtbenobo]

32. It's a matter of trust.

Some, people get worried when their car won't start. Others, just walk in to town. Because; they have to.

[Warpy]

33. Well, shit.

I cling to the illusion that Will Pitt is just getting too busy over at Truthout to post much here any more. I like that illusion. I hope it's not delusion.

Losing Kentuck would be a great loss. I hope he's just taking time off.

I know I have to take time off from time to time, usually because I've had enough of the word jumpers, outrage trolls, and other resident bullies who think they're progressive. Or want us to.

[merrily]

63. Res Ipsa Loquitur.

[Orrex]

299. Racial Pepsi Cola?

[Igel]

362. Ca va sans dire, if you'd like.

Or "samo soboi razumeetsia," if you're in a different mood.

But that goes without saying.

[underpants]

80. No kidding

Kentuck?

[Nye Bevan]

3. Because a professional journalist who breathlessly reported what he thought was a major scoop,

and turned out to be entirely wrong, is a little too thin-skinned about folks on an Internet message board still mentioning and speculating about this incident a few years later.

[7wo7rees]

6. A few years later? Like 9? Where the hell did that come

from and why? "Breathlessly", Really?

[Scootaloo]

9. because he once said something impolite about the president

And so he's been under constant harassment by a self-appointed Cabal of Pure Thought on DU.

[geek tragedy]

13. Impolite? He used the same language Ted Nugent uses, and has doubled and tripled

down on it since then.

Over what amounted to be another fake Obamacare horror story.

But, he's always been able to dish it out but unable to take it, as witnessed by his insulting Skinner over the Rove story.

[Scootaloo]

17. No, Ted Nugent tells Obama "suck on my machine gun" while brandishing an assault rifle

Kind of a different sort of rhetoric.

[geek tragedy]

22. They both called him a "piece of shit"

and have made clear their intense, personal hatred of the president quite explicit.

Well, it also gets page clicks, so there is an alternate explanation.

[akbacchus_BC]

27. You know what, you are too emotionally involved.

It is free speech and they can say what they want, who fucking cares. But it seems like you want this shit to live on.

Donald Trump called McCain a loser, do you see him coming on here dissing the trump, leave it be. We all know that this current president is the best ever!

[muriel_volestrangler]

77. If that is 'too emotionally involved', then so is anyone worrying about why Will Pitt

has left. And, if it is the reason he left, so would be getting annoyed at someone posting about the '24 business hours' farce.

[Rex]

335. Yeah concern trolling a 9 year old post, because GD is kinda nice/polite ATM and the shit stirrers

can't stand it is 'too emotionally involved'...but you go on with whatever you are making up as an excuse.

[Adrahil]

98. Free speech says you can say what you want, for sure...

but you can't say it without any consequences.

I considered that the most rude, juvenile, over-the-top post I think I've ever seen here.

I respected him as a bombastic and "bigger than life" poster for that.

Before that post, I sometimes didn't agree with him, but I did respect his opinion.

After that past, I think his leaving here improves the atmosphere.

If that's the kind of stuff he's gonna right, then good riddance.

[Democat]

460. There is no free speech on DU

DU bans people every day for saying anything that a few members don't want to hear.

[MADem]

474. There ain't no "free speech" at DU. There are limits to it here.

This is a PRIVATE website, with a TERMS OF SERVICE. The site is all about electing more DEMOCRATS and fewer Republicans to public office. People can't jump on here and "free speechify" about the wonders of a Trump Presidency, or why Jeb! is the Man of the Hour.

The old "rules" used to be cumbersome, because there were many pages of them, and it was a long slog to get through all of them, AND they'd change every so often.... but there are posters here--the rude ones, mosty, I think--who haven't even bothered to read the TOS at all. They don't read the part about electing Democrats, they don't read the part about being civil to one another, and they certainly don't bother reading the big finish:

One more thing: Don't push your luck.
The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

[merrily]

163. I've read again and again that he was in extreme distress then and apologized later.

Yet, it comes up again and again and again, and with such meanness.

Will's comment was about a professional politician who knew what he signed on for when he ran for POTUS and will never see Will's post unless some asshole here makes sure he does. However, Will does see the shit that gets posted about him over and over and over. And he's supposed to let that go while you can't let go of a comment he made about a politician?

Why can't you see the difference? Comment about Will that hurts Will vs. a comment about Obama that Obama never sees?

By you, I don't mean only geek tragedy, but the collective you, all of you who do that.

[geek tragedy]

186. Pitt gets the respect he shows others here.

He's not content to hate the President (and sorry, he's a straight up-hater, whether it's for personal or page click reasons, ergo the Limbaugh-style namecalling), but he also has to demonize people who don't hate the president.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026670461

If President Obama declared that all firstborns be put to the sword...

..some people here would defend it and champion it. "Overpopulation, you know."

Fascinating stuff.

That's one classy dude.

He's never disowned the comments, in fact he periodically brings them back up to reaffirm that he meant it. Any apology was to preserve posting privileged, not because there was any sincere contrition.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024734511

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026887802

Pitt has less respect for President Obama, and Democrats who support President Obama. than do Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and about an equal amount of respect as that shown by Rush Limbaugh.

He knows that's toxic on a Democratic website, and he wallows in it anyways, because he likes the attention.

He can do math--his Obamahate posts get hundreds of recs, his posts criticizing Republicans get ignored.

There are plenty of people who are willing to bash Obama (and Clinton, for that matter) as if either were the antichrist. Pitt is hardly a unique or necessary voice in that. There are literally hundreds of people here who are more than happy to call Obama every name in the book and who are willing to hold themselves out as the high priests of progressive purity while looking down their snooty noses at the great unwashed masses of the Democratic party.

Mind you, he has no problem telling people who disagree with him to "shut the fuck up" in is posts and is not even above threatening violence against women (he got banned, temporarily, for doing exactly that and then daring the admins to ban him).

Edited on Mon May-10-10 08:50 PM by EarlG
Last night Will Pitt repeatedly threatened another member with physical violence. After the moderators deleted those messages he sent the threats again to the member via private message, during which he challenged the member to report his behavior to the moderators, implying that he would not be held accountable for his actions.

We don't enjoy banning people, particularly people who have been here a long time. WilliamPitt left us absolutely no choice in this matter. This is entirely his own fault and responsibility.

Quite honestly, he should never have been let back here after that.

[merrily]

193. Pitt gets insulted personally and individually for a post he makes about some politician or other.

That's what you've shown me.

Show me a post where Pitt lashed out at an individual DUer without any provocation, other than that DUer made an OP about a politician. Because that's what many swarm to do when Will does nothing more than post about a politician. Any other scenario is a false equivalency.

As far as the admins, they did ban him, I assume for a long time and he did not do that again, did he? And I sure don't know what the member did to provoke him. I am not saying Will should have threatened, no matter what the other member said. However, this is a perfect example. This is what I mean. The endless grudges that never go away, even if the poster gets banned. The looking at only one side of the story--and doing that forever. The storing of links to throw back years later. It's so ugly.

[geek tragedy]

198. ironically, I do believe the person posted that in an attempt to defend it.

the issue here is that there's a distinct pattern of toxic behavior, giant flamewars being started with the same guy in the middle of them, the same perception that some people should be above the rules, etc. A cycle that's repeated itself here over the past decade.

if he's going to be treated as a minor celebrity who merits special treatment because he wrote a book, then he has to take the criticism.

And, yes Virginia, when someone accuses the president's supporters of being okay with infanticide, that person deserves whatever scorn comes their way.

[AllFieldsRequired]

255. And he is a journalist? I dont know this person, but how could he still be a journalist

of any credibility if he publicly says this about any politician, let alone the President?

In private, with his family and friends, of course, but a journalist is not supposed to say these things in public.

[geek tragedy]

256. not a journalist these days, more of a polemicist nt

[AllFieldsRequired]

266. What is his name at truthout?

[grasswire]

283. and how would you describe yourself these days?

Hmmm?

You don't even have the talent or credentials of Will Pitt and yet you feel free to throw your OPINIONS (and that's what they are) about him around DU, about as enlightened as a farmer throwing the daily slop to the animals.

Shame on you.

And yes, I will proudly take a hide for this, saying what needs to be said.

[hifiguy]

422. Plus a fucking thousand.

There are some around here who continue to fill much needed voids.

[Nye Bevan]

14. I actually defended him for the "piece of shit used car salesman" comment.

Lots of stress when your spouse is having trouble getting necessary medications approved.

[merrily]

174. It's also apples and oranges in a way.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7017823

Why some DUers here get so personally butthurt about a comment made about a professional politician who could care less what Will posts about him that they think it's okay to shit all over fellow Duer every time he posts is beyond me.

"Why are you being ugly to Will?" "He said something bad about Obama, who could care less. But I have to make it my mission to grind Will down anyway."

And no one seems to see what is wrong with that disconnect.

[JEB]

214. Yep. IMHO the wrong posters are leaving.

[merrily]

270. IMO, that is usually the case.

[Fred Sanders]

262. Said "something bad" about Obama? What was it? Not comparing Obama to a used car salesman

or implying supporters of a twice elected Democratic President are members of a cult that would even approve of infanticide, that would be a rhetorical bridge too far, so I hope not.

[grasswire]

287. I used to say that George W. was meant to be an armadillo herder.

Was that a bridge too far? Should my post saying that be hidden?

[neverforget]

375. The problem here is that people are emotionally attached to the politician so they

see an attack on the politician as an attack on them. Besides, people love to have enemies. With Will Pitt gone, another one will rise to the top to chase off.

[Scootaloo]

416. Yup. I could rattle off a damn list of these people

The ones who are so deeply invested in a politician, that even the lightest criticism is taken as an axe-handle beatdown. All I can figure is that these are people who have no personality, intellect, or beliefs of their own, and so substitute whatever their "team" is saying in the place of that stuff.

It sounds like a terrible way to go through life, to be totally vacuous, and changing your entire personality every four years or so.

[840high]

454. +1

[Fred Sanders]

477. Ditto. Some folks are indeed emotionally attached to a politician as to stocks! Although being

emotionally attached to a highly winning and consistently dividend paying stock like Blue Chip Obama Inc., the top stock for 7 years, is a bit different than having just bought into penny stocks.

Good luck with folks recent purchases, but you do know how penny stocks usually end up?

Me, I stick with the proven winners. Not near as exciting, granted, but one has to be realistic about your returns over the long term.

[still_one]

44. It was a little more than impolite, however, I do not think that is the reason. Will has

subsequently commented on that, and believes referring to the President with those vulgarities was wrong, at least that is the distinct impression I got.

[Scootaloo]

45. Hasn't stopped people from chasing him around with it, that I've seen

[still_one]

48. some, but he isn't that thin-skinned. I don't know why he is leaving, and he sure didn't indicate

the reason in his farewell thread, but I sure don't think it is because of that

[merrily]

179. Some? Some? Are you kidding?

[Adrahil]

101. Oh but then he had a follow-up....

He did apologize, but then he doubled down with the whole TPP thing.

[merrily]

175. He made a crude comment about a politician who will never see it and could care less, even if he

were to see it?

This is a reason for a shitstorm every time he posts?

And this other crap goes back 9 fucking years. But Will is the one who's wrong? My God.

[randome]

183. I guess you're willing to overlook the personal insults he levies against his fellow DUers.

A crude comment in itself would not cause this level of dislike. You shouldn't need to know the backstory to figure that out.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

187. After they swarm to harass and hector him endlessly?

I have never seen one personal insult initiated against any individual DUer by Will. But I have seen him ganged up on time after time. And never with the whole story, in any kind of fair way. No, his defenders have to add that or no one does. I saw those POS swarms many times before I saw the bit about his sick wife and his apology. Disgusting.

[randome]

199. WilliamPitt is not some gentle lamb who needs people to stand up for him.

Last edited Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:26 AM - Edit history (1)

If you think he's being driven from the site, why don't you ask him why. Why doesn't he explain it himself? I doubt you'll get an answer, though.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Skittles]

414. gawd I how detest the swooning pieces of shit

[Nye Bevan]

10. If the "scoop" had turned out to be correct,

I guarantee that people here would (rightly) still be praising Will for it, several years later. So I don't think there are much grounds for complaint. Again, we're talking about a professional journalist, not some anonymous citizen.

[Hissyspit]

29. Could you enlighten me, then, as to why it has been brought up at all right now?

[Nye Bevan]

36. I don't know.

But it is a significant event in DU's history, and will always come up from time to time.

[Hissyspit]

37. It will come up from time to time...

as legitimate discourse OR Internet harassment.

[onyourleft]

83. The...

...latter.

[Adrahil]

104. I dunno....

Did he ever post a mea culpa? Did he ever apologize to people he derided for doubting him (like Skinner)? I did a search, but I never found a post when he came clean, admitted fault, and apologized for acting like an asshat. If he never did such a post, I think the subject is fair game. If he did, point me to it if you know where it is.

[LiberalAndProud]

451. It will come up from time to time in the same way that the Oscar thread does,

or CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!11!! does, or the Olive Garden or fried chicken or Walt Starr does. It is part of our history.

I'm sorry that William's feelings were hurt enough that he felt he had to announce his departure, but that episode was epic. Had he not been so disgruntled, the thread that started this would have fallen into oblivion soon enough, as it was already well on it's way before his latest GBCW post. William is eloquent always and intemperate often. This is one of his intemperate moments, imo. I hope he sees fit to grace us with his presence once again, because he is LEGEN ...... (wait for it) ........


DARY.

[Rex]

340. Because a group of concern trolls were getting mad that GD was somewhat nice and polite

So they dug up a 9 year old post to stir shit and it worked! People need to stop feeding these long time concern troll posters when they do these things imo.

They are shameless so trying to discuss anything with them is a waste of time imo.

[randome]

355. I'd say it was the work of one individual and not a conspiracy at all. YMMV.

I agree with you that bringing up that 9 year old post was stupid. But then WilliamPitt won't deign to tell us why he's leaving, either, so...
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Rex]

358. Us? See that is it right there, your little group of friends made this too obvious

that it was boring in GD and needed some shit stirring so Pitt was picked. You didn't think this was obvious from the beginning?

[still_one]

47. No they wouldn't, even Will agreed he was wrong to use those vulgarites against the president.

However, the argument you make, "if the "scoop" had turned out to be correct they would be praising him". Gee, if only there were WMDs in Iraq I guess some would be praising bush also.

Not trying to get into a pissing contest with you, but I believe that the criticism against the ACA would have been praised, but NOT the way it was delivered. Will admitted as much himself

[Adrahil]

92. Especially since he publicly derided people who doubted him.

I mean, if you're gonna be bold, it's great reward, but at great risk..

Oh yeah, and there was that whole Fuck you, Mr. President, you piece of shit used car salesman thing. I pretty much lost all respect for him after that.

[merrily]

185. "No ground for complaint does not follow from praise for years that never happened.

And I so disagree it would have happened. I have not seen Will's detractors praise him for diddly, even for a minute. He made the NYT best seller list. I never even knew that until I went to truthout yesterday. So much for praising his accomplishments endlessly. But I did see over and over and over ad nauseum that, heartbroken and stressed, he had call Obama a POS. I never even saw from his detractor swarm that he was heartbroken and stressed, or that he had apologized. That I saw only from his defenders. Let's not pretend there's some scales of justice operating here, some honorable point to hectoring him over that, even after he apologized.

[grasswire]

296. speaking as a retired editor...

...he did not technically call Obama a POS. He called used car salesmen POS. Think of that phrase like this: "piece-of-shit-used-car-salesman." "Piece of shit" was describing them. Used car salesmen.

But this has been litigated before, ad nauseum. The haters are still hating.

[merrily]

305. It's ugly. Mob like. Thug like. Then again, I've seen that with posters other than Will.

And always the same group.

[nadinbrzezinski]

312. Key word, always the same (tolerated and coddled) group

a line from Animal Farm comes to mind.

Something about some pigs are more equal than others.

[randome]

352. Oh, that's too good! That OP was not about Obama at all but used car salesmen?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[grasswire]

387. yours is a disingenuous post, randome

but you knew that.

[brush]

107. 9 years? It was less than that. nt

[JDPriestly]

65. And of course, Nye, you and I have always been right and been correctly informed about

everything. We are the perfect ones.

Ah!!! Those poor fools who are not as perfect as we are.

Aren't we wonderful.

Seriously, let's bring compassion to our presence on DU.

Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone gleefully reports something that is entirely wrong at some point or another on DU.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

I read that somewhere . . . . .

It's good advice.

[Nye Bevan]

67. Yes, everyone makes mistakes.

But most of us are not thin-skinned enough that we need to do the "goodbye cruel world" thing when called out on our mistakes.

[nadinbrzezinski]

290. Ahem, that was precisely a call out

And the bullies also do that to me. Don't worry, the time for me to leave is coming near... and it has none to do with bullies. But all do with another aspect of DU that is tolerated. (Though the bullies are a problem and that series of posts was grade A bullying), but antisemitism. Yes, there I said it.

Just because it is coded, does not mean the whistles are not quite loud if your ear is trained to it.

[MADem]

191. Everyone makes mistakes.

But it's normal to apologize when you make a mistake, not double down and continue to act like the Big Man on Campus. It's not about "perfection" at all, it's about apologizing for being shitty to people in heated arguments when you turn out to be dead wrong. It's a maturity thing. And "I had one too many" is not an apology. That's a weak excuse.

I forgive people easily. I think most people do. Especially on the internet--hell, it's just opinions, enthusiastically voiced. It's impossible to forgive, though, if the person who could use a little forgiveness steadfastly insists upon their own perfection and doesn't retract any derision they issued while they were prosecuting their failed arguments. So, yes, from that perspective, your "do unto others" schtick would work real well if everyone involved took it onboard. Compassion is a two-way street!

I think a lot of the dramatics are a waste of time. I'd rather get my drama from music!

[R B Garr]

364. +1, very wise post, especially considering the written word constitutes

statistically only 20 or 30% of any communication with an individual, body language and tone of voice/inflection being the remaining and largest composition of any exchange, which is absent on the internet. So basically, we're all just seeing a fraction of the person's communication, and it's only natural and expected there will be misunderstandings because of the limited medium, so this is a wise point of view to have!

[LeftOfWest]

462. Okay.

noted.

[PeaceNikki]

97. More recently, his "big scoop" on a Turbo Tax "hack" turned out to be bullshit as well.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

120. I was thinking the same thing

He jumped the gun, posted his version of the story before the real story broke. When he was called out on getting the facts wrong, he doubled down on it. That's not how professional journalists should behave, and he should be called out for it. If he's leaving because of that, then good riddance.

[Fred Sanders]

264. Forgot about that one!

[polly7]

147. Breathlessly!!! reported.

Exaggerate much? Everyone makes mistakes ..... that certain hate clubs here pounce on shit that happened years ago to cross yet another off their purge list is pathetic, sad and sickening.

[tabasco]

159. "Professional journalist" LOL

Inasmuch as someone may have paid him for his juvenile screeds, I suppose so.

[Myrina]

224. +1

HA!

[Katashi_itto]

7. Because DU is really a 3rd way promotion tool?

Just my opinion

[H2O Man]

15. 'Spect so.

[TransitJohn]

30. Four legs good, two legs better

[raouldukelives]

336. Indeed. nt

[Warpy]

34. Some of the resident bullies want to turn it into one

Trashing GD-P is one of the smartest things I've done. I did it the day it was created.

[Sherman A1]

68. Agreed

I have several forums & groups trashed and it makes it more tolerable. That said I spend less time here overall.

[Rex]

342. That is part of the problem, they cannot disrupt GD anymore with their garbage.

So they dig up a relic thread from someone they hate to stir shit in GD and it worked. We should stop feeding these concern trolls, since all they do is disrupt GD and crave negative attention.

[still_one]

49. you are wrong. It allows all spectrums of Democratic thought, from the left to middle to right.

In fact if you were to examine the majority of primary posts they are pro-Sanders, and 99% of those posts stand.

[Katashi_itto]

56. Lol. The is only the Corporate Approved Candidate. Anything else allowed to

post is just to help provide an illusion.

[still_one]

59. I thought we are talking about DU? Are you saying DU is part of some "conspiracy" to allow positive

posts about Bernie, to "provide an illusion", because "DU" supports the corporate candidate?

All I can say is WOW!

[Surya Gayatri]

88. Triple that!

[Katashi_itto]

99. Its always open season on any candidate other than the approved one

Hence the reason why two of our most progressive posters are leaving.

[Adrahil]

231. Then GTFO?

I have no sympathy for those who act the martyr but stick around anyway.

If you think the site is an HRC tool (what a fucking laugh...) then leave. That simple.

[Katashi_itto]

394. Armchair tough guy speaks :)

[Adrahil]

396. Wtf? This has nothing to do with "tough guy" bullshit

But why would stay on a forum if you think it's a tool to advance idas you oppose, unless you're just here to troll... Or you're full of crap.

[Caretha]

438. I'm here for the entertainment value sometimes

and to watch people make asses out of themselves....

Proceed Governor

[Katashi_itto]

440. See post #394 :)

[MattSh]

60. All spectrums of Democratic thought, from the left to middle to right?

I sense a contradiction there.

.
.
.
.
.

Hint: Those on the right are not Democrats.

[still_one]

61. Obviously you don't subscribe to Howard Dean's 50 state strategy, or history for that matter.

Here is a little historical perspective for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Democrat

[jtuck004]

74. Those so-called democrats on the right may have been the democrats turning over black

kid's school buses in the 70's. Gave their own kids hate lessons right there on the lawns of the schools.

I didn't think much of those bastards then, don't now either.

[still_one]

192. You are right, but I was just pointing out they have always existed in the party.

[Romulox]

203. The site owners are *obviously* centrists, and Left leaning posters are periodically purged. nt

[Romulox]

201. Nailed. It. nt

[Hell Hath No Fury]

234. Tinoire was the one to --

really bring that info to light wa-a-a-a-ay back in the day. For many years we could maintain the illusion this was a Liberal/democratic home, but with every consecutive primary and election, it became increasingly clear a Party/3rd Way agenda was the true goal. I can't count how many amazing Liberal activists/posters have been jettisoned/chased away over the many years here. Ah, the days of genuine activism here....

[arcane1]

275. She's another valuable contributor that DU lost n/t

[Scurrilous]

395. Her and her sister. n/t

[Zorra]

310. +1 nt

[Caretha]

439. Truth

your post makes me weep...

Old, old duer...so hopeful once, and so glad to find this place ...

now, so sad...and pretty positive the experiment is over

Some days I feel like I'm watching a train wreck in slow mo

[SoCalDem]

461. It just gets so tedious to have the usual scolds show up

and to watch every thread disintegrate into a messy name-calling session, totally devoid of reasoned discourse.. Many of us old timers just found other things to do

[muriel_volestrangler]

498. Tinoire? She left, to start 'Progressive Independent', now 'The Bell Forum', firmly communist

and very anti-Democratic party (pretty anti-democracy, for that matter - they often talk about the uselessness of voting, and how a vanguard should be leading the people to the future they don't know they want yet). She left because she's to the left of the Democratic party, however you look at it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

293. You are actually correct

[hifiguy]

423. It is very much starting to look that way.

[SheilaT]

8. What thread?

Care to post a link?

[Elwood P Dowd]

19. This one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027015044

[Skittles]

12. because there are too many FUCKING ASSHOLES on DU

[H2O Man]

16. "

[akbacchus_BC]

25. Can I hug you Skittles, always loved you even with your ass kicking LOL

They are going to annihilate a lot of DU members who has a say in this upcoming elections. I am wondering what the hosts are thinking!

[Ichingcarpenter]

26. sine qua non n/t

[Electric Monk]

31. A jury agreed with me, while a host did not. The post stands, but I am blocked from the Gungeon.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=170562

[Warpy]

35. Count your blessings.

Really.

[Skittles]

46. I would consider it an honor to be blocked from that POS group

[JDPriestly]

66. I'm barred from both the Barack Obama and Hillary groups.

And the funny thing is that I really, really like Barack Obama. I criticize him, but I criticize my husband too. Doesn't mean I don't love them. It's just that we are all human.

But I am barred. So don't take it personally.

I can think of worse places to be barred from than the Gungeon or some other DU closed group. I don't approve of closing the groups, but it isn't my call.

[Skittles]

71. I AM ALSO BANNED

FUCK THEM TOO

[JDPriestly]

72. I don't feel angry about being banned in Barack Obama or Hillary's groups.

I just feel sorry for people who are so narrowminded.

I'm in the Sanders group and that group bars people too. I don't see the point but that is how it is.

[Skittles]

73. THINK TIGER BEAT

[cwydro]

81. Lol!

Nail on the head!

[KittyWampus]

158. Think Bernie Sanders Group!

[BuelahWitch]

226. When Bernie Sanders' supporters post endless shirtless pics

THEN you can call it Tiger Beat. Personally I don't want to see that, and I support him!

[hobbit709]

90. Being banned from certain groups here is like being on Nixon's Enemies List.

You felt left out if you didn't make the list.

[HFRN]

115. I dont think it's fair to compare the attitude to Nixon's enemies list

not fair to Nixon

[hifiguy]

426. Yep. I avoid certain groups because I know if I speak the truth I might get PPRd.

That I was banned a few years back from one particularly vile sinkhole of a group is something of which I am quite proud.

I reserve the right to criticize sloppy thinking (and "sloppy" is a gross understatement), fanboy/girling and plain old stoopid wherever I see it.

[Caretha]

442. I communicated with those

who started the Sanders group.

I advised against banning.

I so wanted Sanders to be better/different.

That's why I won't join. I'm beginning to think I'm just fuckin' to old and to set in my ways....but it all just seems like a game anymore, and not democratic at all.

[stillwaiting]

84. Changes to DU have MADE it more divisive and bitter.

The jury system and closed groups (and people being "kicked out" of groups) have made DU much less cohesive as a group. We have been splintered more specifically in to clear-cut sides and bitter animosities have developed from this. It's made this site so much less enjoyable to visit.

I have found myself reading comments much, much less than I used to because I can't stand how aggressive and patronizing some of our most prolific posters are around here. As Skittles said, there are way too many assholes that post on DU now. I think I'm going to trash GDP and stick to reading OP's (and not comments for awhile). I experience much less frustration and anger following this strategy. I've also stopped replying to certain posters that ALWAYS frustrate me. I'm going to use "ignore" more judiciously. I don't need to engage with a few of "our" posters. I'm not going to be changing their mind that's for sure.

[Chathamization]

188. Yeah, there seems to be a huge grudge match between a handful of prolific posters that seem to think

it's a good idea to fling their garbage all over the main page. I've seen plenty of times where there's a huge fight between 6-7 people in one thread, then they all decide that they're not getting enough attention there, so they each create their own threads and spread their argument all over the place. Soon the front page is filled with the same threads with the same people having the same argument, where 90% of the posts are usually insulting each other.

Meta and call outs are supposedly not allowed, but we get tons of weasel "I can't believe some people actually think XYZ" posts.

Posting limits would probably help, but I doubt that's going to happen. Without them, if they handful of people (I dunno, maybe 80-90) who make 40+ posts a day decide that this is going to be ground zero for their shouting matches, there's not much the rest of us can do other than leave (or I guess we could just start actually warning on/hiding all the posts we've been letting slide, but again, doubt that's going to be happening anytime soon).

[Igel]

365. Allowed it to become.

Nobody has been forced to become divisive and bitter. That's their own doing.

Same for being rude and insulting or thinking any compromise is betrayal.

[Caretha]

441. Do you not find it very very

curious that a Democratic forum would block you from a group dedicated to the Democratic President of the US?

Does that seem Democratic to you?

This is not.......I repeat....THIS IS NOT WHAT DU WAS ABOUT WHEN IT BEGAN

I do not know for sure, but I guess it is all about money for the administrators/owners of this site.

When it started, and when they recruited people like me, my siblings and friends in the beginning, they (the admins/owners) were all about speaking truth to authority. Damn it to hell and damn all who made it no longer a safe haven for truth!

[Skittles]

496. you have to completely kiss candidate ass

there's no questioning them - fuck the swooners, NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE SWOONING FOR

[stonecutter357]

504. unban me Thanks.

[hack89]

482. So Bansalot only blocks posters after they have a post hidden by a jury?

or do you make the decision to block independent of whatever a jury says? I am assuming you would not condemn a fellow forum host for maintaining the same standards you keep.

[Electric Monk]

486. GCRA blocks people who think solving a problem by having more of it is a good idea. nt

[hack89]

488. And RKBA blocks people that repeatly disrupt.

no difference, is there?

[Electric Monk]

489. There is no RKBA Group on DU. That right there is your major malfunction.

Gun Control & RKBA

[hack89]

490. You can discuss gun contol - we do it all the time

and we welcome opposing views - there is a reason we have only blocked two posters.

But getting back to the original topic - so we can agree that jury results are irrelevant when it comes to being blocked in a group? That group hosts have the power to block regardless of jury results? Right?

[Electric Monk]

491. I'll side with Skinner on this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598342#post1

[hack89]

492. So stop mentioning that jury result if it is irrelevant to the issue

You were blocked. It is time to get over it and move to something productive. It is only an online forum after all.

[Electric Monk]

493. There is no RKBA Group on DU. That right there is your major malfunction.

nt

[hack89]

494. You are not making much sense here

Unless you really think it was your gun control views that got you blocked. Which won't surprise me.

[Le Taz Hot]

38. Couldn't a said it better myself.

:thumsup:

[CountAllVotes]

42. +1,000

No kidding, no damn kidding!

[still_one]

50. It has always been that way

[demmiblue]

52. Indeed. n/t

[MADem]

57. The guy doing the GBCW could be very unkind when he had a mind to....

Calling the POTUS a "piece of shit used car salesman" is something I'd expect to read at a right wing web site, not here. I recall one evening when he was apparently in his cups and issued threats to DUers with whom he disagreed. One of the admins banned him for that. That kind of behavior is not endearing.

And I'm sorry, "hot-breathed progressivism" is not a synonym for "rude shithead."

If one is a writer for one's ostensible living, and isn't just doing it as a 'pretend job,' one should be able to express oneself without using crass vulgarities on a semi-regular basis. I mean, sure, The Rude Pundit does it, but that's a schtick--and There Can Be Only One.

You're only as good as your last column, as Clark Kent and Lois Lane know full well.


He could bully with the best of 'em. He was crude too often, got mean with people occasionally, and got his facts wrong often enough that people noticed. It attracted some negative attention. Not sure what this latest round of teasing is about, but it's not like he hasn't invited a bit of drama with some of his commentaries. I suppose we'll have to wait for someone to reveal that there was some kind of dust-up between him and the person who posted that 'anniversary' thread.


That said, he'll be back. He was William Rivers Pitt, then William Pitt, and there may have even been another iteration here, it's not the first time he's gone off for a while--even if he trashes his password/email combo, he'll return. He's like a moth to the flame~! He's probably got a little campaign gig or something. If that campaign ends he'll be at loose ends again, unless he's joined the nine to fivers; that could cut into his screen time in a big way, depending on the gig.

Or maybe he'll wake up tomorrow and change his mind totally and resume posting here. Who knows?

If people want to leave, they should leave. I think it's probably better to just slip out the back Jack, make a new plan, Stan...rather than post a dramatic GBCW thread with all the attendant recs and "Oh nooooos." It's a bit attention seeking to my mind, and it invites fights within the thread--"You never loved him!" "He was mean to me!!!" It's all ... pointless. Like a soap opera without the dramatic music and good looking/aging but tightened actors.

[Skittles]

58. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[MADem]

64. Whatever, then! nt

[Skittles]

70. yes, exhibit OVER

[KittyWampus]

177. Yes, it certainly is over. LOL!

Perfect illustration.

Bemoan the loss of an "old timer" who wrote witty, enlightening pearls of wisdom…

And then after another DU'er posts a well thought-out, well written post THAT YOU DON"T AGREE WITH, and post "zzzzzzzzzzz".

Well Done, Skittles. Well done.

[polly7]

152. Plus a million. nt.

[elias49]

82. How nice of you to explain.

[MADem]

145. I wasn't explaining--I was just expressing my singular view,

which is worth as much as yours.

It's just an opinion, based on experience. YMMV.

[cwydro]

93. I know we don't often agree,

but this is a good post.

[MADem]

148. Thank you.

I don't get mad at people with whom I don't agree, and I rarely hold grudges. You have to be pretty mean to me for that happen! I like your avatar, btw--energetic, dynamic--makes me feel like I should walk the mountain lion....er, dog, or something!! Heh heh!

[cwydro]

190. Lol! It's a busy little avatar for sure!

I'm the same - I try not to hold any grudges here on DU.

[DFW]

118. Not sure which "anniversary" you meant

But just in case it was me, no dust up whatsoever. Not much communication between me and Pitt at all, really (on board or off), except that he joined in the condolences when I lost a close family friend a couple of years ago (Helen Thomas), which I appreciated, as well as everyone else's. It appears that the ranks of my "amazing elderly" friends thin out soon after they hit 90--I have only one left.

If the "anniversary" person was someone else, please disregard!

[MADem]

165. No, no, no--not you at all.

It was nine years ago last May that this original event happened. I didn't know if there was an ongoing feud or what, but I was speculating that the subject was brought up as an anniversarial reference (e.g. remember when you did this all those years ago?) in a more recent dust up.

I'm not seeing the full context here--all I know is that someone posted a "throwback" reference to that Rove (non) event. I remember when that happened--there were a dozen or more long (well, dial-up or slow shitty DSL long) threads about this matter and at some point harsh words were exchanged.

When I first read the story, all those years ago, I was in the "naive hoper" category--I was wishing for Fitzmas along with a lot of others. It was a bitter disappointment to learn that the story was so horribly sourced and, basically, a load of fertilizer. The upside is that it dialed up my skepticism meter by a hundred-fold. I want several sources before I buy off on a major tale like that one, especially one that raises my hopes, and they'd better not be aggregated sources, either!

[DFW]

227. Oh, OK. I didn't think so

But since I did just post on that theme, I wanted to make sure.

[treestar]

134. Agree he'll be back

I recall the time he asked Skinner to delete his account because he wanted to quit but was addicted. Another time he was actually banned - and was allowed to return after that. This is nothing - the random reminder of the 2006 non-scoop is just silly. I don't think he's that sensitive to quit over that.

[Marrah_G]

69. ^THIS

[whathehell]

110. Yes, and those saying that

are usually themselves guilty of being one, at least once, on this board..

Will is quite thin skinned.

[stevenleser]

151. You're kidding right? The cadre of folks who attacked Obama relentlessly can't take any criticism?

Skittles, how many hits do you think one would get if we did a search on your name and the term "Swooners"? Even with the advances in computers and microchips I think most computers would choke on the count. This criticism of Obama and folks supporting him by you and others is ongoing for 6+ years now.

But some criticism of Bernie and those who support him for a few weeks makes those folks doing it "assholes"?

I'm sorry, you and most folks in this thread complaining don't have the standing to call anyone else names for criticism of others.

Not at all.

[polly7]

153. Right backatcha!!!! nt.

[stevenleser]

155. That post doesnt make any sense at all. nt

[polly7]

157. Really???

- your reply to tragedy. (You know exactly what I mean.) You have no fucking room to talk about anyone else.

[stevenleser]

160. And your version of events is still incorrect. But please continue. nt

[polly7]

161. BULLSHIT. nt.

[stevenleser]

162. Nope. I have two kids. I would never laugh at the loss of a child. So you can stop manipulating

people to try to get them to believe your version of events.

[polly7]

166. Well you did!

And not just one, but two children.

You replied with: - period.

Fuck your changing history to 'manipulate people'.

[stevenleser]

168. Nope, the laughter was at your inability to prove my contention wrong. And you wanted to distract

people from that so you turned it into a bullshit story about me supposedly laughing at the loss of your child.

Fortunately, most people saw through that. I received a lot of PMs in support including after the OP you created that you self deleted before I could respond. Really brave that.

[polly7]

173. i received a lot of pm's too.

Nothing but disgust.

And nope, your laughter was at my post in which I mentioned the death of two children, one my own.

PERIOD. Who the fuck would do that?

I have to go now, your posts make me sick.

[stevenleser]

178. I'm sure you did. I have many detractors here who would leap at any criticisms of me

What you did with this situation was some of the most manipulative nonsense I have seen in my entire lifetime of online experience.

All because you were losing an argument.

[polly7]

244. You're a sick, sick person. nt.

on edit: and no, the pm's had nothing to do with anything I said.

They were all comments on your post. Try harder - you seem to care more about what your fans here think about you than saying or doing the right thing. Perception of your image is everything for you, isn't it Steven? Imagine yourself in my, or anyone else's shoes you'd reply to that way ....... you can't, you don't have it in you. Empathy is something many people lack, I do get that. But don't fucking turn around your ignorance on me. Shame ........ you should have it.

[stevenleser]

246. Your trying desperately hard to manipulate things to make it seem that way, that's for sure.

Let's cut to the heart of the matter. I would never make the leap to assume someone was laughing at the death of a child.

I would ask them straight up if it appeared that way. And frankly I would believe it if a person said no, because, hello? Who goes around assuming people are that way?

You have enjoyed that accusation against me way too much.

[polly7]

251. Your post spoke for itself.

It was this -------------- Do you think people are stupid?

No following apology, explanation, message of remorse ........ nothing. So I made a thread about my Karley with pictures to show he was a person who didn't deserve to be laughed at, while you post threads on your child - who, by the way, is beautiful. You said nothing on my thread then, either. All you have to offer is - poor, poor me ........ look at how you're trying to make me look. Pathetic and made/makes my stomach sick.

[stevenleser]

252. Your manipulative response spoke for itself too. I can't imagine doing that to someone.

What you did is probably the worst thing a DUer has done to another DUer.

[stevenleser]

261. Stop pretending and playing the martyr, OK? You know exactly what you did.

Trying to portray someone as laughing at the death of the child just to win an argument.

And lets not pretend your behavior started there. You have been behaving like this toward me and other people for years. Your abusive PMs to me started long before this. And you sent the same abusive PMs to other people. All of this by you is manipulative nonsense.

[stevenleser]

267. No, I didn't and you didn't even bother to ask what I meant. You ran with it like you loved it.

You didn't care at all what I meant.

All you cared about was, "YAY, I can use this against him. Everyone will forget about the argument, feel sorry for me and think he is a terrible person".

I can't imagine what it would be like to be like that.

[stevenleser]

274. A liar? Its exactly what you did. It's what you continued to do here. In a completely unrelated

thread, you hijacked it to get more mileage for your manipulative bullshit. Most people are on to you, you know.

Lots of folks have been around people who are extremely manipulative and they recognize it for what it is.

A creep? A creep is someone who sends unsolicited abusive PMs to half a dozen people.

You've got the lock on the creep title.

[polly7]

281. On to me?

For what?

Tell me .......... I'd like to hear what I've done. Certainly never laughed at the death of anyone's child, or anyone, period.

Manipulative - again, look in the mirror.

You really are fucking unbelievable.

Poor, poor Steven.

[stevenleser]

284. Yep, other folks pointed out that what you were doing was manipulating the situation.

I didn't see it at first. I thought it was a simple misunderstanding.

But what you did went way beyond misunderstanding. You loved it. You went on a campaign with it.

Classic manipulation.

[stevenleser]

288. And for the record, I am not the person who alerted. The person who clued me in that you were

manipulating the situation when it first happened, they PM'd me and said they were alerting.

And no, I am not revealing who that person is.

[stonecutter357]

505. you need help and a lot of it.

[stevenleser]

508. Yeah, it's hard to fit that person's behavior into anything resembling

what most folks would consider within a thousand miles of OK. When you understand all the aspects of what they did here, I still can't believe it to tell you the truth. And that doesn't even include the prior things like unsolicited abusive PM's to half a dozen to a dozen folks and more.

What you said in your post times a billion.

[SidDithers]

302. I've got PM's too...

And for what it's worth, I can attest to how your post is being deliberately misrepresented.

Though, my backing may do more harm than good.

Sid

[stevenleser]

306. Yup, several folks in that thread back in February got abusive PMs. That was months before the

argument that Polly and I had where the main dispute from this thread arises.

And thanks for coming here and speaking up.

[R B Garr]

311. Thank you, stevenleser!!! Some people go to ghoulish lengths just to make

things personal to get posts hidden. Thanks for pointing it out.

And you are right that a lot of folks have been seeing this -- for awhile now.

[stevenleser]

314. Thank you. I didn't know what I was seeing when she started in on me. I made the assumption that

it was a genuine misunderstanding and tried to explain that this was not what I meant.

But she didn't care what I meant... at all. It wasn't about that for her. It was all about getting the mileage out of being able to attack me as if I meant the worst possible thing.

I would like to say more but I don't want to get a hide. Suffice to say that the behavior was hideous.

[R B Garr]

374. 100% correct. You didn't deserve any of that.

It was very contrived. I know you can't say more.

[bravenak]

417. You did NOT deserve that crap. Sorry she treated you like shit.nt

[stevenleser]

434. Thank you. I have seen some screwed up behavior on DU and online but this

Was some of the most twisted bullshit I have ever seen. Truly. And it was to win an argument that was pretty inconsequential to begin with.

Maybe at some of the anti-DU stalker sites you see stuff said about DUers like this.

If one does a search of my posts during some of the most heated arguments I've had with folks you will see where I have asked people something along the lines of, "do you really mean that, because what you said sounds like..." When it appears they have said something particularly outlandish. And I give folks the opportunity to explain.

Not this person, and when I explained that's not what my post was about, to go on a manipulative campaign to try and convince all of DU that i did mean it that way? It was completely FUBAR if you understand the acronym.

[bravenak]

446. I know what she was doing. I know because I have know very manipulative people who like to

use their trauma as a club against others. I have lost a child myself and that pain is personal. It is not okay to use that trauma as a weapon. I would never do that. I cannot imagine even thinking about it. I'm kinda horrified. I suppose that was her flameout? Tsk tsk.

[stevenleser]

447. I'm very sorry to hear that but I am grateful you shared that

I said exactly that in a PM to someone today, if I lost one of my two daughters, God forbid, the last thing I would do is try to use that as a weapon against someone in an argument. That is unthinkable. And if I though someone wrote something that suggested they were laughing at my loss, I would be shocked and I would definitely ask them if that was what they intended to do. I wouldn't go on a weird campaign to use that as a weapon and certainly would get clarification.

It is horrifying behavior.

Regardless I'm very sorry for your loss. I had no idea.

[bravenak]

448. Thank you.nt

[msanthrope]

507. You know, I missed that whole episode, and have only been able to piece it bit by bit.....

Last edited Sat Aug 1, 2015, 01:43 PM - Edit history (1)

But my spidey sense tells me something very manipulative and underhanded went on, and failed.

On edit--I now have a Polly7 PM. I must be special.

[stevenleser]

509. You would not believe what that person pulled. PM me and we'll talk

Alternatively you have my cell IIRC, call me.

[stevenleser]

513. Oh and if it is one of those abusive PMs, post it as a response here before alerting on it.

Those abusive PMs need to see the light of day.

[bettyellen]

512. seen it doens of times before- and you are right, often over an initially small disagreement- there

comes some bizarre attempt to make the other person seem incredibly cruel and "sick, sick!!" is screamed from the rooftops.
Very often there is a cleanup where the worst posts are hidden, and you find out you were baited as half your posts were alerted on.
Been there and done that a few times!

[LeftOfWest]

463. yes it does.

it really does.

world wide web means read world wide.

read a poster called earlg recently on 'the nation' forums.

[stevenleser]

468. No, it doesn't and your post is even more unclear and more bizarre. Nt

[7wo7rees]

196. Standing with polly7. Right back at you Leser! nt

[stevenleser]

209. It doesn't matter if one or one thousand believe something wrong, it's still wrong. nt

[Romulox]

200. Agreed. One of DU's worst. nt

[MADem]

169. Ouch! That arrow hit the mark! nt

[stevenleser]

232. I really don't understand how some of these folks can post this crap after all they have said.

And the irony is, they are still dishing it out on both Obama and Hillary and their supporters at a rate many times that of what Bernie and his supporters are getting here.

They outnumber us by some crazy margin like eight to one and are still claiming to be the downtrodden ones here.

The hypocrisy and need to play the victim (and that takes many forms) is retch inducing.

[MADem]

247. +1. nt

[Octafish]

172. What Skittles said.

[SidDithers]

180. Yup, DU is full of assholes...nt

Sid

[Octafish]

202. How do you define asshole, SidDithers of DU?

Is it a DUer who does nothing other than get DUers banned?

[SidDithers]

208. No...

but I'd include homophobes, racists and anti-Semites as part of the definition.

And, I'd go so far as to say that homophobes, racists and anti-Semites should be banned from DU.

Sid

[Octafish]

217. Is that why you use those terms to smear me?

I would think DUers wouldn't have to defend themselves from constant attack from that sort of thing.

From various posts from 2012 to the present day:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022073759#post46

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026089110#post61

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026178887#post105

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026398318#post395

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10026455660#post7

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027005752#post25

Seeing how I am not, nor do I support homophobes, racists and anti-Semites, that constitutes a pattern of smearing. Some define that as bullying behavior.

[SidDithers]

220. I said you promote homophobes, racists and anti-Semites, octafish of DU...

which you do, every time you promote the writings of Paul Craig Roberts (white-nationalist racist), or Wayne Madsen (homophobe) or Israel Shamir or Christopher Bollyn (anti-Semite).

Sid

[Octafish]

230. I quoted articles they wrote to shed light on Bush crimes.

Instead, you use them as an excuse to vilify me.

At the time, like now, there was no law against quoting them. To the point:

I've asked you, repeatedly over the years, to show what you term my "propensity for promoting and legitimizing the work of noted bigots, racists, homophobes and conspiracy theorist lunatics. You're a guy who thinks white-nationalist Paul Craig Roberts and insane homophobe Wayne Madsen are credible, and appropriate sources for use on a progressive message board."

Seeing how you fail to actually show any of that, I want these to be in the record for all DU to see:

Where I quoted Roberts when he supported Don Siegelman:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022073759


Where I quoted Madsen recently to document the business links between Bush and bin Laden:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6059251


Where I first quoted Madsen on DU2 in 2003 (earlier examples exist, but none so illustrative):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x610051


Where you smear Naomi Klein, making me think the practice is your speciality:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5318151

Readers will note that I did not support any theory, smear, or lie; I only posted what these people wrote. And as far I as I knew or know, none of these people are anything like what you describe.

So, why do you continue using them to smear me?

What's a person called who repeats something that is not true, SidDithers of DU?

[stevenleser]

241. Except, according to your self professed principles, you can't call them crimes. No convictions.

Or is that just in certain circumstances, for certain people.

[Octafish]

248. That was a nice smear, ''rapist apologist,'' stevenleser.

How many different threads? Three? Four?

[stevenleser]

249. Then answer. Why do you treat accused rapists different from everyone else?

Why do they get some kind of special treatment and the Bush folks dont? Either you have the principle or you dont.

[Octafish]

278. Like I wrote and you could not figure out: the point is Justice.

Guilty until proven innocent means a journalist doesn't label a suspect a "rapist."

That is different from ignoring the crimes of the accused rapist.

Why is that so hard for you to understand, stevenleser?

[stevenleser]

300. And as several of us have pointed out, that supposed principle is unevenly applied.

You've never explained why.

[Octafish]

325. Of course I have. Journalists do not call suspected rapists, ''rapist.''

It has to do with libel law. As for "never explained," why did you think I bothered to respond to you a dozen times here?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6954410

It's not much fun discussing anything with you, stevenleser, what you know.

[SidDithers]

245. What, you want links to posts where you're promoting PCR, or Madsen, or Bollyn?...

I've given those to you dozens of times.

You're not denying that you've promoted these odious writers, are you? Lots of DUers have commented on the nature of some your sources. You laughingly call that tag teaming. What it really is smart people observing a pretty obvious trend.



Sid

[Octafish]

250. No need to. I just posted them in Reply #217.

And no where do you show where I'm wrong or an asshole, SidDithers of DU.

[SidDithers]

254. I never claimed you were wrong, octafish of DU...

Only that you have a propensity for promoting odious writers. Which you've done again here.

As fantastic DUer msanthrope posted recently, how hard is it to not link to the racist author?

Sid

[Octafish]

269. A 'propensity.'

Which implies I do something frequently, which, as I showed, is not the case.

Other than that, it's also a smear.

[SidDithers]

301. Semantics...

linking to racists, homophobes and anti-Semites at all is too often.

Sid

[Octafish]

321. Keep digging, SidDithers of DU.

It's so...you.

[msanthrope]

506. why.... thank you for the compliment sid......nt

[bettyellen]

511. the racist, anti-semetic and homophobic sources you constantly link to here are all total assholes

And that you tend to keep going back to these same sources- again and again, despite knowing how horrible they are- tends to discredit you greatly.
Also, yeah- calling Bushco criminals while arguing you shouldn't do the same toward Cosby here- hmmmmmm.
Seems like you have a very narrow view of who matters here.

[raouldukelives]

337. Yep, You can always tell when they pucker up. nt

[Zorra]

194. I didn't mean to say all conservatives are assholes..

What I said was that all assholes are conservative.
apologies to John Mill

[winter is coming]

205. May you grow a thousand more legs, mighty Skittles. You'll need them. n/t

[newthinking]

272. The worst offenders are actually very few but very prolific

There are a few here that are either astro-turfers or just have nothing to do except try to drown and insult anything that does not fit their precise worldview.

I pretty much ignore them anymore.

The site just went through a years long drought of progressive and intelligent analysis and IMO it seems to me like in general people are waking up. It is just a few that are pain in the ass disruptor's.

[Armstead]

286. But it wouldn't be DU without fucking assholes

[sibelian]

399. When did THAT become the norm?

There were big fights. It was never like this.

[Generic Other]

317. They act like big game hunters

baiting people, luring them to the edge, alerting, banning, gloating, bullying. So many butts that need kicking now. Even you can't keep up!

[n2doc]

346. yep n/t

[Rex]

359. Skittles cuts out all the unnessessary words and gets to the core of the matter.

It does become very obvious when GD is in Slow Mode and everyone is being polite to each other. YES INDEED.

[neverforget]

392. You're so correct and a lot of them wear it with pride.

It certainly makes DU suck.

[Marrah_G]

466. Marry me!

[Generic Other]

495. Results of your jury, dear Skittles

On Thu Jul 30, 2015, 11:03 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

let's call them what they really are: FUCKING COWARDS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7025511

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Since we're speaking of bullies here, why is this person allowed to go around SCREAMING invectives at fellow DU'ers without consequence? This post is the rudest, nastiest posts that I've seen on this board. Ever.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jul 30, 2015, 11:23 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I predict 7-0
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Skittles is merely defining a bully. If you are not one, you are not what she said.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alerter.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: May be missing entire context, but if the objection is to putative obscenity, I find it somewhat of an overreaction.
If, however, "Skittles" is calling someone (Pitt or another DU'er) a coward, that is irresponsible.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Skittles]

500. typical

BULLIES CAN DISH IT OUT BUT THEY CANNOT TAKE IT

So glad the juries are seeing through their BULLSHIT

[Owl]

499. Yes indeed.

You have that right.

[PatrickforO]

18. Hmm. I like DU and to me it doesn't seem abnormal or hostile.

I'm sorry about Pitt and Kentuck, because I've come to realize how much of a community this really is. I like coming on here and having my say. It's cool, even if people don't agree with me. No prob, you know? Because it is a forum where we can all be heard and I certainly don't expect everyone here will like me or what I say.

As to the middle way, and the right wingers - hey, as long as they aren't too ugly we can just refute them with facts. If they are too ugly we can alert them (I've never alerted anyone, though because I don't believe in censorship as a general rule, unless it is totally egregious). But we have a pretty cool jury system.

I see a lot of people bitching about having their posts hidden, but what we have here is SO much better than the arbitrary way sites like Huffpo handle it. It really is. Because all of us (I guess) can serve on these juries. I've served on several.

Maybe I'm happy because I don't take the things people say back to me too personally, because hey, it's the internet...

That said, William and Kentuck, I am new here, relatively, but I don't think you should leave. I think we need both of you.

[still_one]

51. That is a healthy perspective, not only hear, but for a lot things

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. Surely, people don't really believe they're leaving?

Ah, you'll learn, friends.

You'll learn.

[Egnever]

23. Heh

[GusBob]

76. Will we ever learn?

Seems as if WP has left several times now. Gobs of attention on the way out, gobs of attention on the way in, gobs of attention when he stirs up shit.

The minute something good happens or something bad happens to his candidate in the primary he will be back.

It's all about the drama, clicks , attention and adoration

[AngryOldDem]

78. I think it's a way for some to validate their worth on a message board.

Will they miss me when I'm gone? Will they throw themselves across the virtual threshhold and beg me to stay if I head for the exit? Will my absence leave a big, dark hole in the DUniverse? Can people truly live without my opinion?

Better than a soap opera, watching the Cult of Personality in action from a distance.

(Now, I am kind of sad about Kentuck. Other than that...not so much because I've seen this silliness so many times before.)

[DawgHouse]

116. ITA

[treestar]

142. This ^^^^^^^^^

Yup.

[MADem]

171. Thank you for a good morning chuckle!!

[akbacchus_BC]

21. Because the system does not want to hear the truth!

[Maedhros]

28. They are leaving because the levels of intellectual dishonesty here on DU

are reaching truly disgusting proportions.

[still_one]

53. It is a discussion board for gosh sakes with different views.

[Igel]

371. And yet Maedhros is correct. n/t

[winter is coming]

210. ^^ This. I hope we still have a domestic barrel industry.

The bottoms of extant barrels have been scraped so often that there must be nothing left of them. Replacements will need to be purchased. I hope that money's not going overseas.

[sibelian]

401. I think I would have said: "utterly self-destructive proportions..."

... but you're right.

I don't think the perps realise what the potential consequences of their strategies are. It's unsurprising, really. Control freaks never quite get round to the idea that nothing's controllable forever until the thing they're trying to control falls splat on its face into smithereens all around them leaving them nothing for their efforts.

Dishonesty destroys itself.

[Maedhros]

404. There are four kinds of posters on DU:

1. Those with an agenda to disrupt, obfuscate, derail and distract.

2. Shameless partisans who don't really believe the things they post, but do it anyway because that's how you win elections.

3. People with an axe to grind who are spoiling for a fight.

4. Posters who engage in actual debate.

The last group are in the minority, and growing fewer by the minute.

[sibelian]

406. Once the critical mass has been acheived...

...there will come a tipping point where the ratios of types 1-3 to type 4 is so lopsided that there won't be enough type 4s for the other three types to annoy and they'll start eating each other.

Oh, well. That's what happens when emotionally underdevelopment becomes the norm...

[Maedhros]

409. When I identify posters as types 1 - 3, I place them on ignore.

I encourage others to do so as well.

For a while it worked like a charm, until the primaries started and huge swaths of posters turned into Type 2.

[sibelian]

415. Well, to be fair DU is an openly declared "type 2" website.

I think it's to be expected, although it irritates me. My own disappointment comes from when type 2s give up all sense of proportion and devolve into type 1 or 3...

[LiberalEsto]

436. There are other kinds

Those who see so much conflict (and dislike conflict) that they're afraid to post almost anything for fear of being ripped to shreds. Like me.

[Maedhros]

459. That's the result of such a toxic forum.

People who want to discuss issues in good faith are discouraged from participating.

[dbackjon]

403. From which side?

I am undecided on my primary votes, but the Sanderistas are reaching a Ron-Paul like obsessive status, and frankly it is off putting.



My main goal is to make sure that a Democrat occupies the White House in 2017 and beyond. Much nastiest from those that swear to not vote for Clinton if she wins the nomination.

[Maedhros]

405. That would be you, for throwing a pejorative "Ron Paul" out there.

/ignore.

[DonCoquixote]

39. This happens every primary

When Du gets into a civil war between those who think a certain candidate is the Messiah/Virgin Mary and those who are sick of the candidate being pre-selected between the ones the rich have vetted. The mask of objectivity slips, and lo and behold, all those rules that were supposed to keep order get ignored, if you happen to be on a certain side.

[still_one]

54. Actually, I have seen it worse at times

[question everything]

40. Kentuck had at least one post this morning?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027014724

Why would he leave?

[still_one]

55. I guess someone better let Kentuck know, because everyone else in this thread seems to

[Elwood P Dowd]

62. Tonight's Kentuck post.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027015044#post26

Said he wore out his welcome here and was leaving.

[question everything]

211. That's Pitt's not Kentuck's... (nt)

[Go Vols]

292. Wait for the page to load

it goes to Kentucks post.

[question everything]

391. Thanks. Many posts there

Either way, I hope that both will take the summer off and be back in time for the beginning of the elections process.

[Crunchy Frog]

41. Based on past history, I'd say that William Pitt will be back after a hiatus.

In the 12 1/2 years I've been hanging out at DU, I've seen him leave a number of times, and even get banned on occasion, and he's always ended up coming back.

And I mean absolutely no disrespect to him, as I greatly admire him as a poster. Just reporting what I've observed over the time that I've been here, and that I have no reason to expect that the pattern will be different this time.

I'm sorry to hear about Kentuck. Don't know why he's leaving.

I've been pretty scarce here myself the past several months, so not terribly clued in on current dynamics.

[JTFrog]

225. Or after sleeping it off. n/t

[cwydro]

43. Apparently, Will Pitt had his feelings hurt because of an old post someone dredged up.

At least, that's how it was explained to me.

I don't know about Kentuck.

I do know that Pitt has "left" DU at least three times and always returns. So I don't know why anyone should be worried.

It's good to take a break if you start taking things too personally on a message board.

[LiberalElite]

85. One of two things should happen IMO

they leave Will Pitt alone about being wrong fifteen years ago; or
he stops giving a s**t about them.

[cwydro]

91. Succinctly put. nt

[mythology]

207. Pitt has a few other issues than just being wrong about Rove

He routinely tosses out emotional screeds that aren't based on facts and gets very upset when he gets called on it.

I get why it appeals to some, but I never found Pitt to be anything other than a tedious mediocre writer.

[Surya Gayatri]

87. Excellent, universally applicable advice...

"It's good to take a break if you start taking things too personally on a message board."

[Jersey Devil]

96. yes, but I have to give kudos for the drama on this one

I am predicting 7 curtain calls

[alcibiades_mystery]

124. Over/under on the return thread is 260 recs

Smart money's on the over.

[MADem]

176. I wouldn't bet against that!!

With posts that include words like "dear" and "happy" and maybe even an old school "Right on!"

[underpants]

86. Good grief people I go on vacation and people freak and leave DU

I'll be back next week. Just chill out, it's going to be okay.

Sheesh. One week off and the whole place goes nuts.

[MADem]

181. You know what, though? There is something about you that I STILL MISS!!!!!!

And that's those damn dancing underpants you used to have that danced across your sig line.

No matter how shitty a day I had, no matter how many stresses, how many issues, how many problems...and it sure didn't matter if you and I were agreeing on something....I'd see those damn dancing underwear and just laugh my ass off.

They truly "made my day!"

So I'll miss you for the week you're gone--even though you aren't flying those dancing underwear any more, every time I see your name I picture them in my head, and I smile!

[Oilwellian]

184. We just fall apart when we lose our underpants

[Codeine]

89. So they can bask in all the attention being paid to them.

People who are leaving just leave. People who want attention do the GBCW thing, often repeatedly.

[SidDithers]

95. +1...nt

Sid

[Jersey Devil]

94. This has gotta happen every 5 years or so

Michael: How bad do you think it's gonna be?

Clemenza: Pretty goddam bad. Probably all the other Families will line up against us. That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with that, they was just asking for trouble.

[CTyankee]

100. Going to the mattresses?

Who'll make the sauce?

[Jersey Devil]

105. You could also work "Ground Hog Day" into this one

It's just so funny that after not having been here in quite a while I stopped in and see the exact same stuff happening that occurs every single primary year here with the same actors.

[CTyankee]

106. I always miss the drama.

It's frustrating. There are some real insiders here on DU and I always feel like I missed all the fun, thrills and chills...

[merrily]

108. With meatballs, it's gravy. Ask any Italian who makes pasta and Sunday gravy.

When it's marinara (meatless), it's sauce.

[CTyankee]

114. Ah, yes. Gravy.

I'm wondering if that's from Sicilian dialect translated...I never heard it in Italy myself but I hope to return to Sicily and will find out...

[DFW]

121. L'ombra lo sa! n/t

[CTyankee]

126. non lo so...

[DFW]

131. Bisogno domandare all'ombra!

[CTyankee]

139. io non domando...

Perche? non mi interessa

[seaglass]

127. My mom was Sicilian, she was the first generation born in the US. None of her family ever called

it gravy.

[Jersey Devil]

119. I dunno. In Joisey it ain't gravy unless you add leftover pork chops or a piece of leftover steak

Meatballs alone don't take it over the top

[merrily]

128. Brooklyn says Joisey. Joisey don't (sic) say it that way. Most of the Italians I know,

including my inlaws, are in Jersey. Mostly Jersey Shawrrr. Bricktown, Tom's River, Long Branch, even a couple in (as my mom called it) Big Deal.

My MIL's head almost exploded when I called her Sunday gravy "sauce." She was born in Jersey City to Neopoliltans and married a Sicilian from her neighborhood. They had moved to Ridgefield before I met them.

Pork in gravy is fantastic. Never had leftover meat of any kind in gravy, though. One of the best Italian cooks I ever met--a lady in my Boston neighborhood who was 86 when I met her, used the traditional veal, pork and beef in her meatballs, and used pork fat (which the butcher gave her free) to fry them in, before transferring them to the gravy.

Maron! Could she cook. (Gone now.) My FIL's sisters and my MIL--all fantastic cooks, too. But, for all of them, it's gravy if made with meat.

[Jersey Devil]

380. Well, my Dad used to say Boigenfield (Bergenfield), "Joisey" and would change the "earl" in his car

and he was born in Hoboken. True most of the Joisey stuff comes from Brooklyn, but not all.

[CTyankee]

129. I have seen folks put a piece of a pork chop in the gravy and I think the bone

might also be the reason...

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

341. And when it's made with cornflakes, what's it called then?

Or made with cornflake-crusted meatballs?

[merrily]

348. I give up,

[deutsey]

112. My decision to revert to lurker status here

has done wonders for my mental health.

I've been here since 2001. This place has had its ups and downs, but it's definitely at a very low point right now.

[merrily]

132. Not here since 2001, but it sure has gone downhill since I joined.

In the very beginning, there were more good discussions than I see now.

[7wo7rees]

206. Yes x 10. Thanks for stepping into the fray.

Sad few days for all of DU.

[Generic Other]

316. I have missed your voice

but I understand the reasons for your silence. For every person who says goodbye and leaves us, there are twenty who just drift into lurk mode -- usually the very voices we stand to benefit most from hearing!

[deutsey]

470. Thank you!

That really does mean a lot to me.

[sibelian]

331. Here's something I posted on DU of old, a loooong time ago, back when I was "baby_mouse"...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2686418

Look at the responses.

I wouldn't dream of posting something like that now. Can you imagine how DU would respond? Not like that.

[sibelian]

113. Because this website...

Is.

Broken.

[cwydro]

117. No, it's not.

This kind of stuff has been happening for years.

[sibelian]

318. Yeah, not like it is these days.

It's unrecoverable.

[JCMach1]

215. Nah, just the Primary cycle...

happens every 4 years.

[Maedhros]

298. Nah, there have been toxic posters stinking up the place consistently since I've been here.

I have a huge ignore list to prove it. What makes it worse is that they all cheer each other on. A toxic chorus, if you will.

[merrily]

320. A mob. Though some aspects of a relentless Greek Chorus are also present.

[Maedhros]

333. Less a mob, more a tribe.

A tribe bound together by slavish devotion to the leader figure, which sees splendid raiments adorning the Emperor and which attacks any who hint at His nakedness.

A tribe dedicated to the central dogma: "What our tribe does is good, what their tribe does is evil - even when both tribes are doing the same things."

[sibelian]

398. This is no ordinary Primary cycle.

This one's really bad.

[B Calm]

122. They'll be back. One of them took some time off right after the last election,

a few weeks later he was back.

[randome]

125. Asked but never answered. It's a mystery!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[treestar]

136. Kentuck is progressive ? I didn't know that?

Sorry can't help myself.

[NCTraveler]

137. Kentuck will be a major loss to this community. Will be missed. nt.

As for Pitt, this is simply a part of who he is. This is HIS mo and should not be thought of as a reflection on du in any way. He hasn't gone anywhere. His gbcw post is a part of his style.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

138. I think Kentuck was jesting in that thread.

Seems to be his style. I could be wrong, however. As for WRP, well... This isn't his first goodbye cruel world (and most certainly won't be his last). He thrives off the attention.

[MADem]

195. Wasn't his possible departure phrased in the form of a question?

Something like "I guess I should leave too...?"

[Armstead]

304. Kentuck often posed things as rhetorical questions

Part of his style.

I hope it was a rhetorical question because he'd be a loss.

[tabasco]

150. I will miss Kentuck. n/t

[Android3.14]

167. Have they ever come off as self-absorbed flighty creative personalities with hurt feelings?

Maybe if we all acknowledge their total awesomeness they'll get over their snit and join us in the sandbox.

[Codeine]

197. Close the thread.

We have a winner.

[MineralMan]

233. All that's needed is a couple of "appreciation" threads with hundreds

of recs, and they'll return "by popular demand." I think that's how it works, anyhow. Seems to be the pattern.

[randome]

236. The 'creative' part extends to liberally peppering one's posts with 'fuck' and 'shit'.

And some here eat it up.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Andy823]

280. Yep,

I have seen a few where it's only one sentence, mostly cuss words, and it still gets 100+ recs, by the same group that recs all "doom and gloom, trash and bash, and of course "we hate Obama threads.

[Armstead]

289. Kentuck is definetly NOT that

He has always been the opposite. Very low key and understated and even handed and not prone to gettuing heated up.

This surprises me.

[leveymg]

170. They are welcome to return, the sooner the better. I understand their frustration and disappointment

This place reflects the growing and increasingly bitter divisions within the Democratic party between the progressives and the not progressive wings. It's a split that goes back to 1948 when the party fractured three-ways: The Progressives (Henry Wallace); the Dixiecrats (Strom Thurman); and the Cold War liberals (Harry Truman). A major surprise to many, Truman still managed to beat Dewey by about four percent (and Wallace and Thurman, each of which gathered about 2.5 percent of the vote) that year.

Something like this is happening again, and it will be increasingly acrimonious until this shakes out.

[Romulox]

204. The more this website becomes a Rightwing/"Centrist" safe haven, the more people will leave. nt

[Generic Other]

338. They seem not to want the left here at all

The real progressive voices are mocked, bullied, baited, and silenced.

[LondonReign2]

343. That seems to be the objective of a cadre of posters

[theboss]

212. Pitt was due for his annual temper tantrum

This too shall pass.

I don't know who Kentuck is.

[JCMach1]

213. Will Pitt has left DU more times than I have fingers (and possibly toes)

so many times I can't remember...

He will be back.

[theboss]

216. I don't get why people still fall for this routine

We've done the "Please don't go with him routine" a dozen times at this point, haven't we?

[JCMach1]

221. It's just Will

just sit back and enjoy... LOL

Will, will always be Will

[Orrex]

257. Where there's a will, there's drama.

[JCMach1]

222. DU has never pretended to be a news source, but a community... a community that reverts to a den of

insulting back-stabbing trolls every 4 years for the Primaries and transforms to warm hugs during the General Election... That's just how we roll.

[merrily]

323. +1

All the nonsense about being thin skinned misses the point. If you find yourself in a sewer, you leave, and not because the sewer hurt your feeling.

[Myrina]

223. Pitt leaves every couple of years ...

.... he feeds off the drama and the adoration. He'll be back. Again.

[avebury]

228. Perhaps the time has come

for a new progressive website if the DU PTB are going to allow DU to continue its downward spiral.

[MineralMan]

235. Want them to come back? Well, just start an "Appreciation Thread."

That's how it's usually done. A couple hundred recs and they'll come back "by popular demand." It seems to work a treat, from what I've seen.

[Orrex]

242. I read Will Pitt's postings to see what people were talking about three days ago.

[Capt. Obvious]

282. You could go to Alternet

and have all the old news in one place.

[nadinbrzezinski]

279. SHort version, because we have a school yard

where the bullies are allowed to run rampant by the principal, like any good school in the United States.

I gave up on the jury\alert system because of that. I also do not put them on ignore either, because it does not work.

[Hiraeth]

285. probably because of crap like this. I would have deleted if some one had the decency to ask me

rather than alerting on it. and Juror #1 ... wow. The info is all over FB right now. Thank you Juror #4

On Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:39 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

more info
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7018315

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

From the TOS:
"Respect people's privacy.
Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet."

Calling for a boycott is one thing. Going on a hate filled rant (even tho the guy is definitely a shitbag) and then posting his address seems pretty aggressive.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:54 AM, and voted 6-1 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Not only a hide, but this DU member needs to be banned for this transgression.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Absolutely. No doxxing. In fact, the mods need to delete this post in its entirety.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with alerter.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I just can't get behind an internet harassment campaign. The man faces criminal charges as he should.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

[Coventina]

291. Totally bogus hide. You posted his BUSINESS info, not his personal info.

Business info is posted ALL THE TIME on this board!!!

[Hiraeth]

309. Thank you, Coventina for noticing the difference.

[MADem]

349. No. DIFFERENCE. He is not a "public figure." He's a frigging dentist.

The HIDE was on point. Read the doggone TOS.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.

How would you like it if I posted YOUR name, your job title, and the address of YOUR place of work....hmmmm?

I don't like what that guy did at all--but we don't do that kind of thing here.

"Business info" is posted all the time....by people running their business. By people whose details are in the newspaper already. That was a 'dox' plain and simple, and that's inappropriate.

Anyone who supports that kind of thing needs to check their ethical compass.

[Coventina]

351. I did read the TOS: private/personal is NOT business info.

By your standards, every time we post about a police officer on this board we're violating TOS.

[MADem]

353. Bullshit--police officers are "public servants." What did you think that

whole "to protect and serve" business is on the side of the government-provided police cars? Protect skin from sun damage, and serve margaritas?

Police are paid with taxpayer dollars, and serve local, county and state governments.

Dentists are paid by their customers.

This guy is in a PRIVATE practice. He is not a government employee, like a cop is.

So...try again. Or better still, acknowledge that the TOS is anti-doxing, and calibrate your stance on this matter.

I sure as hell don't like what this guy did, but I don't like what YOU did, either.

Answer the question--is it ok if some creepy internet sleuth find out your name, your work position, and your place of work? How about your spouse's? Your kids? Is that "OK" just because it can be done, and maybe someone doesn't like what you did or how you talked?

See how WRONG that is when it becomes personal?

[Coventina]

354. I didn't post the guy's information. I was only saying the poster who did got a bogus hide.

Clearly, we have a fundamental disagreement on this issue.

I would never waste my time looking up people who are suspects of a crime, but I think having his business info out there is a public service, so that people are made aware of his criminal activities (this is not the first time he's had problems for hunting illegally) and know not to patronize him.

[MADem]

356. YOU keep AVOIDING my question--would you like it? Would you want someone here who

didn't like you, for whatever reason, to post your full NAME, your job title, and your BUSINESS ADDRESS and telephone?

Would you like that?

If you don't want it done to you, you shouldn't do it to others.

The only time DUers will reveal information of that sort is if they are seeking customers for themselves, or if information has been widely reported in the news media--then it becomes a matter of public record.

This shit is coming off facebook. Would you like it if someone raided your facebook page and started putting up your pictures, talking about your life, etc?

This is not a "public service." Giving the street address of a person, putting it out there in a "pass it on" way, puts this jerk's actual LIFE in danger.

It's called DOXING and it's one of the ugliest things a person can do on the internet. Particularly to someone who has a high likelihood of receiving death threats.


You're wrong on this. The TOS has that in there for a reason. And "I didn't do it" is no excuse. You shouldn't defend it.

[Coventina]

357. OK fine, I wouldn't like it. But I am not a criminal either. If I were to commit a horrible crime

like this guy did, I would expect that such a thing would happen to me.

I don't have a Facebook page, nor do I do any social media beyond DU.

But, if you think that this guy is being treated really unfairly, there are a lot of other threads and posters out there to yell at besides me.

I still don't think any wrong has been done this guy, considering the circumstances.
His info is all over this board.
If you think it is so horrible that that is the case, I think you need to take it up with the admins.

[MADem]

363. We have a TOS here for good reason--it's because we're not animals.

We hold to basic standards of civility. And if this guy ends up dead because some idiot with a gun decides to take "revenge" on behalf of that lion, will you still think that no "wrong" was done to this guy?

Two wrongs making a right--and that is the excuse you are shopping with "his info is all over the board" --is pretty situational.

Do unto others, and all that.

[Coventina]

366. People have been murdered in that way long before the internet existed. If some whack-a-doodle

kills him over this it will be because of THEIR wrongdoing, not people on the internet.

That's like blaming heavy metal or video games.

About his info being all over this board - I still don't see that as a bad thing. I was only pointing out that if YOU are disturbed by that, you need to go yell at a bunch more people, not just me.

[MADem]

368. You are enabling bad behavior with your endorsement of this--can't you see that?

You've already said that YOU wouldn't like it--so why do you think a "torches and pitchforks" approach is a good thing?

This is a very ugly POV to read on a so-called "progressive/liberal" message board. It's frankly some of the most un-progressive and un-liberal stuff I've read here in a while.

It's NOT like "blaming heavy metal or video games." Shit--giving a guy's address, his name, his PICTURE--that's what the mob guy does when he orders the "hit."

If you support this kind of thing, your hands are not clean.

And telling me that you're just a face in the crowd doesn't cut it either. Either you have principles, or your ethics are malleable.

[Coventina]

370. He posted the pictures HIMSELF! He comitted the crime. He chose to brag about said crime

on the internet!!!

My principles say, he brought all this on himself.

[MADem]

372. He didn't post his business address, his profession, and his telephone number,

nor did he post a formal portrait of himself.

You are basically cheering the dissemination of information that could get a person killed. He may not be a nice person, but who among us wants to be judge, jury and executioner?

If he ends up dead because some idiot decides to take a shot at him, it will be because idiots are spreading around his personal details.

That's how abortion providers end up dead--because some assholes on the internet think it's "cool" to publish their personal details, simply because they disagree with what they've done.

It is just not a cool thing to do. It is certainly not a cool thing to endorse--or excuse.

[Coventina]

373. I don't think you have to worry about the good dentist. If he was worried about his safety,

he wouldn't have posted pictures of his crime on the internet.

He, and only he, is responsible for the situation he finds himself in right now.

[MADem]

379. I think you are being deliberately obtuse. And, as it turns out, you ARE wrong.

He did not post his business address or phone number on the internet.

Yet you're cheering people who do.

Proof:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=8430

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7018315


It's not "necessary" to the story to post that guy's business address and phone number and formal photo. You can hate what he did without taking that step.

You do realize that if you post crap like that here, and some DUer goes crazy and decides to get all Clint Eastwood on the guy, that it could put the site owners in a bit of a fix? Anyone suing might or might not win, but lawsuits cost money.

[Coventina]

384. No, I understand your point, I just don't happen to agree with it.

[MADem]

385. Well, the admins don't agree with you. So you'd better slow that roll.

Look at the links in the post just above--I edited while you were responding.

[Coventina]

388. I did take a look at it, thanks!

If the admins think I'm worthy of deleting or banning, they will take action.

It's their board.

I, however, do not depend on the admins to shape my world view, just my behavior on this board.

I have never posted anyone's info and never will.

But, I won't apologize for thinking that business info was justified in this case.

Disagreeing with the admins is allowed, as long as you don't break their rules.

[stevenleser]

367. I'm honestly not sure if that would be considered against the TOS or not. I wonder if Skinner would

clarify.

[Coventina]

369. It would be good to get clarification.

I mean, if the good dentist was not a public figure before, he certainly is now!

[stevenleser]

381. Looks like Skinner thinks this was a nono. See link...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=8430

[Coventina]

386. His reply still seems to indicate a gray area, although he deleted the post in question.

"Better safe than sorry" doesn't draw really clear lines, but it does indicate a preference for caution.

It's Skinner's board and we play by his rules.

[cwydro]

295. His same info is in another thread about this subject.

Did that one get hidden too?

[Hiraeth]

307. IDK but, it would only be fair. I am not on here enough to keep on with all this. Thanks.

[fizzgig]

319. i juried a different post that included the contact info

it got hidden

[Coventina]

324. I can't understand why. We post business contact info here all the time.

Why is this case different?

[cwydro]

339. Maybe those particular jurors enjoy the hunting of sanctuary animals...

Who knows?

[Arugula Latte]

328. It will be whack-a-mole. That info. is getting out. The more they hide, the more it will be posted.

[Arugula Latte]

326. That was ridiculous. That info. is all over the Internet.

I might have "mentioned" it again in the same thread ... you know, the information about the scumbag lion-murdering dentist Walter Palmer whose practice is River Bluff Dental, 10851 Rhode Island Ave, S. Bloomington, MN, 55438 and whose work phone # [phone]. I'm referring to the evil creep who looks like this:

[Arugula Latte]

327. Juror #1, YOU should be banned.

[stevenleser]

376. I posted an "Ask the Administrator" about this post because I honestly am not sure.

I am unclear whether the TOS provision: " Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet. " applies to someone's business/company address and phone number.

[stevenleser]

382. Skinner apparently agrees this post violated that portion of the TOS.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=8430

I could have fallen into the same trap you did and gotten a hide.

[Hiraeth]

393. All someone had to do was ask me.

That was my point. I thought alerting was supposed to be the last resort. Seems some in here take great glee in the nanner nanner/gotcha game. Childish.

[stevenleser]

397. Yeah, that doesn't seem fair. I wouldn't have known, like I said.

Sorry man.

[Hiraeth]

449. Thanks for understanding.

[Rex]

330. DUs expert concern trolls seem to be really busy lately trying to run people off.

They are so good at it, that their pool to pick from is now small. IOW, same shit - different day.

[kelliekat44]

344. they have made up their minds. Time to move on. All the best to them. nt

[olddots]

402. DU has be ome Rolling Stone Magazine

no comment .

[TeeYiYi]

419. I'm worried...

...about the 'c' key on your typewriter, olddots.

TYY

[XRubicon]

411. I just noticed how perfectly formed my naval is

Wait... What's that! Lint... Lint... In my naval.

Oh, what did you say again?

[MADem]

475. Naval .... vessel? A destroyer? An aircraft carrier? A submarine?

"Make all preparations for getting underway" then!!!!

I think you mean navel!!! Spell check wouldn't catch that...!

[XRubicon]

480. Thanks for the spell check

Please don't interrupt again.

People need to stay focused on what's important.

[MADem]

481. ..........

[Horse with no Name]

430. After reading through this thread and sub-threads

I'm really happy that I have made myself scarce around here.
I thought it turned ugly a couple of years ago and here it is...much much worse.
FWIW, I miss those who are leaving and who will be leaving (as seen on a Facebook post earlier).
DU will be a much less credible place if those that say they were leaving really do follow through.
What a sad state of affairs.

[840high]

455. I hope Pitt comes back soon.

[Horse with no Name]

469. I don't think so

"That's why I'm sittin' on the front steps,
Staring down the road, wond'rin' if she'll come back -
This time I don't know.
After she packed, when she looked back
There were no tears in her eyes,
And that's got me worried thinking
Maybe my baby's gotten good at goodbye."


Pretty sure this was it.

[Betty Karlson]

457. The Democratic party is splitting up.

So is the GOP. There are popular movements all around and the PTB only want to make those movements go away.

The GOP has been partly taken over by the radical right-wingers.

The Democratic Party is experiencing the reaction on the left: an effort to fight a Bush-fire with a sandstorm.

[Fearless]

456. I'd question how many of us still visit the same websites

We did 15 years ago. Friends do come and go. Some are bitter endings and some are new beginnings. In the end, people leave for their own reasons. Some come back. Others don't.

If you're sad that someone is leaving, tell them. Let them know that they're cared about.

Otherwise, this, all of this, is just continuing a giant shit storm, and everyone loses.

Incidentally, DU is no different than it was a decade ago. We see it differently because we are the survivors of that decade. Those who were banned over the years would likely have seen it differently. Those of us who are now frustrated with the site see it as going down hill. Those of us who still enjoy the site see it as good or even better than it was. Perspective is highly individualized and we each take from DU what we're looking for.

[malokvale77]

503. In a nutshell...

DU is not progressive.

[NuclearDem]

510. Yeah, I mean only 98% of people are Sanders supporters.

Clearly this site is nothing but a Third Way propaganda outlet.