Recent threads on Israel

[King_David]

Anybody else worried?

[hrmjustin]

1. In terms of the policy threads or the out-and -out bigoted threads.

[hrmjustin]

2. The out -and -out bigoted threads have been just disgusting!!! WE may not always agree on policy,

but Anyone that talks against my jewish brothers and sisters I am not with them. We must speak against bigotry.

[Betsy Ross]

3. Extremely troubled.

I try to stick to reading news and avoiding the commentary.

[meti57b]

4. The replies posted throughout PCIntern's thread are stunning.

Why isn't there an interest in having a forum for what goes on in other nations of the middle east. For example, in Saudi Arabia, women are required to wear a black sheet over they heads in public and are not permitted to drive, among other things they are not permitted to do.

We could start such a forum, but I highly doubt there would be enough interest or posts to keep it going, ......... unless we could somehow work "Jews" into it. Then we would have a winner.

Maybe we send foreign aid to Israel, but we send a lot of money to the oil-producing nations of the middle east, instead of developing alternative fuel and energy independence, ourselves.

[King_David]

6. There is a ME group

But your right it doesn't create that much interest when Jews are not involved . Heck any interest in Syria is trivial compared to what happens in The Jewish State.

[King_David]

5. The Brazen bigotry

And rabid reaction to Zionism seems far worse than I ever seen it .

[oberliner]

7. Same as it ever was

Whenever threads about Israel are posted in the main forums, this is pretty much what happens.

What I find really ridiculous is when posters complain about this site being too-Israel or how criticism of Israel or standing up for Palestinians "isn't allowed" or some such nonsense.

I also continue to be disturbed that some posters readily use Nazi terminology with respect to Israel.

[Mosby]

8. you're right about the main forums

Overall though I think the quality of the discourse at DU is rapidly dropping.

Antisemitic characterizations are increasing quite a bit, when in the past would a phrase like "bloodthirsty zionist" make it pass a mod? Never. Same goes for all the nazi germany comparisons.

The juries are tone deaf, they don't understand what posters are doing by referencing zionists instead of jews. Some of the most. rabid antizionists have picked up on this and are leveraging this jury weakness as much as they can. There are a few posters I have in mind but I don't think I should name names.

While I never really liked that blogs were excluded for IP posts, the current "anything goes except for stormfront" threshhold is just making DU look foolish, FFS people are posting OPed from racists like andrew sullivan now because they like what he says about Israel. Posters are linking to hate sites like ifamericansknew.

I think we need to tighten up the ip group and a good start might be asking the admins for the chance to elect hosts. We never really had that opportunity, I agreed with the majority at the time that carrying over the old mods was OK. With much respect to Lithos and UGRR I think we need more involved hosts from both sides, I would have no probem with violet or douglas carpenter for example as part of a balanced hosting group.

[King_David]

9. I disagree about the hosts thing

I don't see there could be impartiality from ones mentioned ... It's too emotional and hateful and polarizing to work .

Most of us on the one side are not detached "observers" and that's part of the thing that drives the other side crazy.

[oberliner]

10. I disagree too

That sounds like a nightmare.

[King_David]

12. +1

My first day here I was greeted by one of those mentioned as " enjoy your brief stay here on DU ".
I think half of us would be banned from the group within hours .
Just check if you ever been put on ignore .. That will tell you .

[oberliner]

13. How do you check that?

I didn't realize that was possible!

[King_David]

15. You can just see how many people are ignoring you under your transparency page .nt

[oberliner]

17. Wow - I have 12!

That is insane! Why would anyone put me on ignore? I am unfailingly polite and respectful to all. That absolutely blows my mind.

For the record, I have no one on ignore.

[Mosby]

18. lol, that's bad.

You are maybe the most polite, respectful poster on DU.

They can't deal with the message, so they cope with the cognitive dissonance by ignoring. Classic strategy.

Finally, perhaps the most important way people deal with cognitive dissonance is to prevent it in the first place. If someone is presented with information that is dissonant from what they already know, the easiest way to deal with this new information is to ignore it, refuse to accept it, or simply avoid that type of information in general. Thus, a new study that says ice cream is more fattening than originally thought would be easily dealt with by ignoring it. Further, future problems can be prevented by simply avoiding that type of information -- simply refusing to read studies on ice cream, health magazines, etc.

http://www.beyondintractability.org/bi-essay/cognitive-dissonance

[King_David]

19. I have 5

I have no one on ignore.

[King_David]

20. There is someone that never answers myself or you... (not mentioning names)

Or anyone else he disagrees with on IP.

Usually he just answers 'anti-Israel ''anti Zionist" 'what I consider anti Jewish' posts with an emoticon.

Probably has us both on ignore ?

Anyway he applied to be a host on Day 1 of DU3 ....Can you imagine?

[oberliner]

24. Now I am up to 13

Who are these people?!?

[King_David]

25. Ha ha too funny..

I still have not blocked anyone.

I have 8

[Behind the Aegis]

21. 16/18 -- I have no one on ignore.

[question everything]

23. I have never ignored anyone

Not even during the hard days when I supported Hillary Clinton back in 2008.

Interesting, I have one star member ignoring me and one blocking an email from me, and I have been back for only a month after absence of 2 years.

[Mosby]

14. I didn't explain my idea very well

Hosts really can't do much, lock threads and ban posters from the group. What I'm suggesting for example is to have 6 hosts, three pro israel and three pro palestinian and all decisions made by a consensus of at least one person from each side. Other groups and forums are using a consensus method and afaik hosts seem to be taking their jobs pretty seriously.

But I think the hosts involved in decisions all should be named, it would force the hosts to take ownership in their decision. Take the death porn thread that was locked and then unlocked (by consensus) poeple should know who did that and why they decided to ignore tos and sop. The admins should follow up with that via some sort of alert from the hosts who were in the minority. That entire process should be made visible to the members of the group.

The new du3 transparency is just for show unless it is linked to some process or mechanism that improves the alert system and civility, and provides clear direction re acceptable source. I think that is what a lot of people are struggling with, what good comes from the meta forum, nothing. It's for show, its a spectacle that ironically diverts attention away from the actual issue.

[oberliner]

11. It's almost good that this stuff passes now

People have to be held accountable for their posts. In the pasts, one could be fooled into thinking various posters were reasonable because their more disgusting stuff got hidden or deleted.

[ellisonz]

22. Same as it ever was...