I was going to post a positive about Hillary in trending now but put it here

[Omaha Steve]

Edit to add link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/110712447

I would have said something about how I wouldn't hold the photo against Hillary in the first place. Shaking hands and kissing babies goes with the territory. Much different than when the people she was meeting were hand picked.

I'd rather see her shaking hands with the public than behind a rope from the press any day.

And that is all I have to say about that.

[marym625]

1. Don't sweat it

Last edited Tue Jul 14, 2015, 11:24 AM - Edit history (1)

Happens to the best.

I really don't care about the blocking. It's the high fiving each other for really nasty stuff that speaks volumes.

And that's all I have to say about that!

On edit. To be clear, I care about them blocking you because you have done nothing but support the supporters of Clinton, regardless of who you support in the Primary. Because they take issue with you creating the ACT BLUE account, even offering to donate $50 of your own money, they lock your post. Then block you after you finally got upset.

Pretty shitty way to treat someone

[kath]

66. Mary- speaking of "high fiving each other for really nasty stuff", have you seen this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=10425

At least two of the hosts of that group participated, and the rest were probably aware of it. (Referenced posts are available in the Transparency page of the "pillar of the DU community&quot

[marym625]

67. Yeah.

I honestly don't like to get into that stuff. I saw a few things because someone brought my attention to it. But yeah, I don't understand. Truly just don't. Good for you for calling it out.

[MADem]

2. Post it in GDP then--don't get all Meta about it.

If you were misunderstood, and you ARE a Clinton supporter (highly unlikely given your sig line), you can ask the hosts to let you back in.

If you aren't planning on voting for HRC, you're probably better off staying out of that forum at this point in time.

The Sanders Group won't let people post anything positive about Sanders without a fealty pledge, either--so that's just the way it's rolling here on DU with the candidate groups.

We just have to Get Over It.

[Nitram]

3. Good advice, MAD. You've hit the nail on the head.

[Omaha Steve]

4. Since when is a positive about Hillary here in in GD-P Meta?

I missed the memo.

[MineralMan]

5. It's not the Hillary thing. It's the complaint about being

blocked in a group. That's the meta part, Steve.

Threads complaining about Democratic Underground or its members; threads complaining about jury decisions, locked threads, suspensions, bannings, or the like; and threads intended to disrupt or negatively influence the normal workings of Democratic Underground and its community moderating system are not permitted.

It's likely that an alert on this OP on Statement of Purpose grounds would lead to a lock of the thread by the Hosts. You might want to consider editing out the part about being blocked in the Hillary Group.

[MADem]

6. Your post is complaining about DU rules. You are angry that you were blocked from a group, and

you're making a thread about it. That's meta--and it's disruptive meta, too.

Here is a link to the memo you missed: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1251

Statement of Purpose
A forum for general discussion of the Democratic presidential primaries. Disruptive meta-discussion is forbidden.

[Omaha Steve]

7. I stated why I couldn't reply in TRENDING NOW only for clarification

No complaint.

Alert & lock on a positive post then.

[MADem]

9. You asked. I answered. This thread is disruptive meta and I'm not the only one telling you this.

If you weren't annoyed at being blocked from the group, you'd have no need to complain about it here.

If you really want to impart the positive information about Secretary Clinton, kill this thread and impart it in a new thread in GDP. What you're doing now is lashing out because the Clinton group has excluded you. I'm sorry you're upset, but there's nothing to be done for it. You've been redlined. It happens. Life goes on.

[jeff47]

12. They must have forgotten to send me the fealty pledge. (nt)

[MADem]

14. By your words they knew you. nt

[jeff47]

17. So there isn't one, you just like smearing a group you disagree with. (nt)

[MADem]

49. Who's smearing? Explain yourself. Don't make charges you can't back up.

I welcomed Sanders to the race, I expressed my heartfelt admiration for the man, but because I wasn't a "supporter" in the way the hosts of his group want him to be supported (i.e. a pledged primary voter), I was shown the door. I even provided helpful links to correct misimpressions about media coverage of him when he declared his candidacy. I was nothing but positive, but because HRC is my first choice--and I lacked the requisite fealty--I was given the boot.

Now, what was that you were saying about smearing? I've given you a very specific example of what happens if you don't declare loyalty to the candidate of choice in a given group.

Now--make no mistake--they have every right to run their group in that way if that's their thing. Fine, whatever!

But no crying about being "smeared" when it's plain that no dissent is brooked. And that IS what is happening in some groups, to include the one that tossed me out, because people don't want outsiders in their midst. Let's just not pretend that 'smearing' is happening because some groups are closed, mmmkay? It's more like "limiting membership to active supporters."

And this thread is megameta-ing on!!!

[marym625]

15. Give me a break

What was done to OS was shitty. He may not support Hillary but he has supported her supporters.

He has never posted anything anti Clinton in the HCG.

And sorry, we do not block anything like that. Just ask someone that has 10 deleted messages in a few hours before being blocked from the BSG. Would never happen in the HCG. Would have been blocked for showing up

[Puglover]

16. Exactly.

That poster was given the benefit of the doubt many times.

Scootaloo was banned for truth telling about a vile hidden post that had utterly NOTHING to do with HRC.

He just had the temerity to disagree with a host.

So I do wish that group and it's supporters would spare us the disengenous bullshit.

It's there for all to see.

[marym625]

21. +1000

[Agschmid]

18. I never posted anything anti Sanders and I got the boot...

I don't go around complaining about it but it happens on both sides.

[Puglover]

19. Maybe not.

Bernie supporter or not let's just say you weren't a good fit.



Oh and for the record, "I don't go around complaining about it."

You just did.

[Agschmid]

20. Yes and that's just about the first time.

And that was barely a complaint, don't be so sensitive.

Weren't a good fit.

Wow. Yet at least two of the posts I wrote the text for are still pinned right to the top...

[marym625]

22. and you told me you agreed with the ban

Because of your actions.

If you don't, please take it up with the person that blocked you instead of complaining about it here.

[Agschmid]

25. I'm fine with the ban.

I did take it up with them, at the time. Nothing came of it.

My point is to say both sides aren't guilty of the same actions is foolish.

[marym625]

27. Please

You know exactly what what went down. Let's not pretend you were all pro Sanders and were just blocked.

Not doing this. You know exactly why and you have said yourself you agree with it.

[Agschmid]

28. I'm a Sanders supporter.

Again I authored two of the threads pinned to the top of the group, let's not pretend I was someone out to get Bernie... I clearly was and AM not.

One of those threads is the one you keep updating, and I'm cool with that and happy to see it happen.

I'm excited to see Bernie progress and to see his results improve...

[marym625]

30. Why are you complaining about something now that you said you agreed with at the time?

Either take it up with the host that blocked you or stop.

You were well aware of why and agreed with it. I'm done

[Agschmid]

32. Again I'm not really complaining...

I'm just saying both sides do it, and for one side to pretend to be above the meta drama is rediculous.

[marym625]

34. find me one post

In the BSG that calls Hillary a "flaming turd" that a host high fives. Show me that and I'll agree.

[Agschmid]

35. No.

It happens it's right there but I'm not going to do the digging for you. We could all hold hands and STOP the meta, STOP the divisiveness, and STOP the shutting down of idea sharing....

But that isn't going to happen.

Buckle up its going to be an interesting few months.

[marym625]

38. I don't have to research

I know it can't be found

I commented on this one particular person and issue. And I won't change my mind on it.

[MADem]

51. Me neither--and I got axed straight away.

I was told that because I wasn't a "supporter of Bernie" that I was a troll and wasn't wanted. I was accused of "not supporting his candidacy"--FWIW, I do support his candidacy, I did then, I still do, and I said that, clearly. I was told that because I would not campaign or vote for him that I didn't belong in the group. I was accused of working for CNN, I was labeled with the "stupidity" word, and even called a shit stirrer!!

You don't have to take my word for it--read all about it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280796

One more time, and this has not changed, dispite the shitty treatment I received:

I support Senator Sanders' entry into the Democratic primaries.

Can't wait to hear what he has to say in debates.

I think he has some important comments to make.

Hillary Clinton is my first choice, but I will vote for any Democrat--or any independent running under the DNC banner--over any Republican.

Now, they're free to wall off their group and limit it to Bernie voters and campaigners, but they're not going to get away with playing a game where they insist that they're the victims of meanies in the HRC group, when they pull the same tactics out and use them con brio. Goose, gander, and all that...!

[MADem]

52. Check out post fifty one. You DO block "anything like that."

Stop playing the victim. The proof is in your group.

[marym625]

55. Bawhahaha!

Yeah, 26 replies to one post while you did dis Sanders for "dodging the question about running as a democrat.."



And, btw, never played a victim and never will.

Enjoy your fantasy world

[MADem]

61. See--there you go with the insults and mockery!

My world is not a fantasy--it is reality. I was explaining reality, and a few of your membership just didn't want to hear it. That's your problem--not mine.

I was watching the TV, watching the WORDS coming out of Sanders' mouth, where he WAS "dodging" the question (using actual WORDS) --and I wasn't dissing him for it, I was simply stating a fact. Watch the interview, and then try telling me otherwise. I understand why he was doing it--and continues to do it. It's not a "diss"--it's just simple fact.

The DNC has said they welcome him under the tent. Most of the state parties are fine with his participation as is. But I want you to show me where he has a (D) after his name--because he doesn't. So who was 'dodging' again?

If you don't want to be perceived as a victim, stop acting aggrieved without cause.

[marym625]

62. wow

Just, wow.

[MADem]

64. Yes indeed--just "wow."

My sentiments, precisely. With the little face palm, too!

Anyone can follow the link and read what it says. Anyone can go to CNN and watch the Sanders announcement Wolf Blitzer interview, which was a very good exchange, too, surprisingly. It was in-depth, not horse-racy, and a nice conversation.

Don't play the "wow" game, and act like that is a move.

I will come right back around, and encourage people to do their own homework. And they might be saying "Wow" when they see that I'm not saying anything that isn't stone cold fact.

[Omaha Steve]

23. Flawed logic

Ask the O'Malley Group (in public or private) if I'm welcome there.

I got a couple thank you replies today from a post in there last night. A week or so ago the reply was how nice it was to have me in there with a for the good of the party attitude while being openly Bernie.

[boston bean]

33. umm, Steve, I am saying this with all sincerity, but you have linked

to right wing blogs to bash Hillary.

You posted an O'Malley fundraising link in the Hillary group. You criticize members and hosts of the Hillary Group.

You are not a supporter of Hillary.

You support Bernie Sanders, fine.

Why is it a big deal that you were blocked? It really isn't in the scheme of things.

Best just to go on if you feel an injustice, it will wane with time.

[Omaha Steve]

45. I posted ONE with the source in the title so people would know where it came from up front

It was meant to be used to refute the material. I self deleted it after it got out of hand.

Again between pain meds and 1/2 wits I don't see things like the rest of the world. I posted about my FTD with the intention of never posting again. Everybody begged me to stay. I've gotten worse. Got any advice?

I asked in the Hillary group how to handle that a couple weeks ago on a interview Hillary gave that was all right wing BS. I shared the link with a host. I self deleted the post after I got no good advice in the replies. The story has never appeared on the DU. I kept it to myself.

I posted Sunday a right wing hit piece about Thom Hartman so it could be debugged in GD. Same thing.

I posted the $50 challenge in GD-P. It got no action. So I posted it FIRST in Hillary's room. It got locked before Martin's group took advantage of it. They were very happy to almost double what they had raised in total since he announced.

It bugs me DUers don't use the link for Hillary. It is embarrassing that just the DU Bernie link has out raised ALL of Hillary's committed Act Blue fundraising: https://secure.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/39658

OS

[boston bean]

54. Steve, I am going to be bluntly honest, so please take it in that vain.

Probably most, Hillary supporters here are not going to want to donate to an act blue set up by a Bernie supporter, whom they have witnessed being hostile to Hillary and her supporters here.

[Omaha Steve]

57. Yet I was will willing to help by putting $50 in the donation link for her

There were Hillary supporters that would have jumped at it if it hadn't gone to O'Malley first.

I'm done with it. Let somebody else build a link for those that want it and I'll take mine offline. It is only up now by request.

[boston bean]

58. I do think that is the best for you Steve. For reals..

This is just a message board. It can be mean. It can feel unfair. Hell, I've felt all those things myself.

But for your own sanity, just let it go. It's not that important in the realm of things.

You have your family whom loves and adores you. That is the most important thing in the world.

I know my families love and support is most important to me.

[MADem]

43. It's not flawed logic, Steve. It's flawed logic to think that the rules

in "The O'Malley Group" are the same as the rules in the Sanders or Clinton group. They don't share hosts.

Tell you what--go into the O'Malley group and start trashing Martin, or even posting "concern posts" with your big Bernie sig line and see how long you last.

[Omaha Steve]

46. I posted the same exact $50 challenge there and they took advantage of it

They didn't take it as raising $ for Hillary in their room.

[MADem]

53. Look--you have a candidate. Support your candidate.

The groups have shaken out so that they support only active, campaigning, championing members. That's life. It is what it is.

It doesn't matter if you--or me--likes a good debate or discussion. That's not what is happening here at DU. If you aren't going to "support" a candidate with votes, organizing, GOTV, etc., the group is closed to you--or me.

And if you don't believe me, go to post fifty one, read the post, and follow the link.

I still support Sanders' candidacy. I don't think much of many of his supporters, though.

[Omaha Steve]

56. I thought I was supporting all three viable candidates of the seven running for POTUS as a Dem

[MADem]

59. You got rid of your "BERNIE' sigline.

Come on, Steve--don't play that game.

You had it up there, and now you don't. You're not an undecided voter. Neither am I.

The BS group doesn't want me, because I am not undecided. The HRC group doesn't want you, for the same reason.

It is what it is.

[Omaha Steve]

60. I didn't touch my sig???

[MADem]

63. Not the one that says 'actblue du for bernie,' certainly.

It's clear you favor him, and that's fine.

Support your candidate, and best of luck to him and you. You're in the majority, here, anyway.

[boston bean]

8. It's not the end of the world. Wanna know one sure fire way never to be blocked from a group?

Don't post in it.

No host can block anyone from a group, unless they have posted in the group.

Usually, people are blocked because they are making inappropriate posts in the group.

I believe you had a thread locked for trying to fundraise for O'Malley in the Hillary group.

Then you went and complained about that in the group by casting all kinds of untrue aspersions on members of the group.

Don't sweat it, would be my best advice. You don't support Hillary. The group is for Hillary supporters.

[Omaha Steve]

10. What was untrue?

I'd like to know.

That I asked the group to debug a Hillary hit piece? It is there. I self deleted after several people were no help in how to debug it including the host that asked me to send it to him.

[boston bean]

11. You don't support Hillary Steve, and you have made

many comments about her supporters on DU.

Members of the group are not going to want you posting in there as it is a place for Hillary Supporters.

Of which one, you are not.

Like I say, it's no big deal. Just move on and let it alone.

[Omaha Steve]

13. So I'm called a liar in this post and I'm supposed to move on?

This all started for defending an attack on Hillary about a tattoo.

I guess I have learned not to defend democrats from attacks (like I tried to do a few weeks ago) and will move on!

[marym625]

24. But he has very much supported her supporters

He didn't exactly get paid for creating the ACT BLUE DU for Hillary. And he was offering $50 of his own money to the first group between Hillary and O'Malley that raised $50. Not exactly true he was supporting O'Malley.

[boston bean]

26. The hosts have a right to determine.

Also, he has had some not kind words about Hillary supporters.

Listen, it's not a big deal. So, he got blocked from a group.

Lots of people are blocked from the Sanders group.

This thread could serve as another reason he has been blocked. The group is for supporters of Hillary Clinton.

Not people who say all kinds of shit outside the group and then expect people to feel comfortable with them posting in it.

I think that is pretty reasonable.

[marym625]

29. We'll have to disagree on the reasonableness of it

[boston bean]

31. Well, you thought the groups actions against Agschmid, noted above

were reasonable...

he/she disagrees.

Simple, if one gets blocked from a group, move on. It is not unfair. It is not suppressing anyone.

It is a group choice as to how the group runs best for the majority of its members.

[marym625]

36. Where did I say that?

I have not said what I think one way or the other.

Additionally, I stated in my first reply to this OP that I don't really care about blocks. I have blocked very few and I don't go into safe haven groups.

I do think that this instance is different and I know it's something that has caused some strife with HCG people and host. I said my peace. We'll have to disagree

[boston bean]

37. I took your vociferous defense of it to mean you thought it was reasonable.

excuse moi.

[marym625]

39. Again, didn't say one way or the other.

My comment was on their own take on it. And that's all I have to say about that

[boston bean]

40. uh huh.. Are you host in the group?

[marym625]

41. Yes

[boston bean]

42. Well, you would be one person who if felt it unfair or not reasonable or just

to try to get it reversed.

Did you try to get it reversed?

[marym625]

44. Again, and for the last time,

My comment was on their thoughts on the block. They have again stated they agree with it.

That's my only point. Their thoughts on it.

Have a great day BB

[boston bean]

47. I think its fair to come to the conclusion you thought it reasonable

from your replies here.

No biggie really.

[Agschmid]

48. Yup.

And that is one of the reasons I don't want back in.

[sheshe2]

69. Sad that you were blocked from the very group on DU that supports your candidate.

I am a new host at HRC. To my knowledge we have not blocked any of HRC's supporters.

[Omaha Steve]

50. I went and looked it up

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251420643

Why somebody complained when B B and I were getting along fine I don't know. The result was a lock I assume because of the public complaint.

I asked the host why it was locked and never got an answer. I admit I was upset and used a word I don't use in public on the DU. But any answer would have helped.

I didn't learn until later B B took her original comment down because it was alerted on.

Or did I miss something here?

[kath]

65. SHAME on those who are fussing with OS. Just unconscionable. He posted a fundraising link for ALL 3

Candidates, and was offering a $50 donation, and got blocked.
(And you all are aware of his health issues)

SHAME!
( if I knew how to change font size, that would be in letters three feet tall)


Some people are really, truly scraping bottom.

[Omaha Steve]

68. Nobody commented on the subject of this post itself