I'm curious...

[gregcrawford]

... I just got blocked from the Hillary group for what I THOUGHT was a fairly innocuous comment, given the vitriol directed at Bernie supporters in that thread. They certainly seem to be an touchy bunch. If they have no desire to interact with Duers who might have a differing viewpoint, why do their threads appear in Trending Now or Greatest Threads, which kinda invites others to comment, doesn't it?

Clinton supporters claim that Sanders supporters are always saying terrible, no-good, horrible things about Hillary, but I have yet to see anything like the malice they say is "all over DU." I certainly wouldn't contribute to it, and I said as much in my comment. Or am I missing something here?

I've never met Hillary, but I have met Bernie, and I've spoken with him a few times on VPR call-in shows. I've joined him on one of his birthday cruises on Lake Champlain, though I missed the last one Because of one of those "I thought YOU ordered the tickets!" scenarios. Oh well...

I've followed Bernie for 35 years, and the only time I've disagreed with him is regarding the deployment of the F-35 in Burlington. Once in 35 years? They ain't NOBODY with that good a record in my book! Hell, I've disagreed with MYSELF more times than that!

I was born during the Truman administration, and for my money, Bernie's the best presidential candidate there has been in my lifetime, and that's including all of the Kennedys.

Any and all insights are welcomed.

[Phlem]

1. Wear it as a badge of honor.

you breathe wrong in the Hillary group and you're blocked. It's that simple.

[840high]

3. You are right. That group

does not want discussion - they want you to fall in line.

[mother earth]

46. Well said!

[gregcrawford]

12. So...

... anything less than lock-step adoration of Her Eminence will get you drawn and quartered, it appears. Damn...

Interestingly, in just the time it took me to write and post my thread, one of the Hillary faithful provided me with an example of supposed Sanders-lovers' perfidy regarding the death of the Libyan ambassador. It was absurdly obvious that this was a Right-wing troll posing as a Bernie supporter, and scanning the 200-odd responses indicated that every Bernie supporter considered the post reprehensible, but I'm guessing he didn't read any of those.

Another thanked me for "invading" their safe space. Excuse me?

Anyway, I will most definitely welcome their hate, and wear it as a badge of honor. Thanks!

[onecaliberal]

25. They are souring it for people who

Might have to vote for the one who shall not be named in the general.
These same people talk about republicans voting against themselves, what do they call supporting a candidate owned by the same people who own the republicans?

[AlbertCat]

50. anything less than lock-step adoration of Her Eminence will get you drawn and quartered, it appears.

That's it.

I was banned because I posted the "Leave Britney Alone!" YouTube video as a very mild joke over how they were clutching pearls and rending their garments over some stupid thing the GOP said about Hillary. They have no sense of humor..... or just sense.

There's a now hidden post there that starts a thread about how awful Sanders' supporters are. Half the responses should probably be hidden also.

Did you know Sanders' supporters have turned DU into Free Republic? Sanders' supporters somehow stack randomly chosen juries! Someone called Hillary a "whore" (Where? When? Let's see it!) and it was Sanders' supporters who let it stand!!!!


Our power is truly awesome.

[gregcrawford]

55. That's something I just don't understand...

... Why fabricate stuff? They love their candidate; we get that. Fine. I love Bernie, but I'm not about to just make shit up to trash-talk HRC supporters. I got my wrist slapped for not knowing enough to zip my lip in their clubhouse, and I accept that. But accept somebody's "right" to spread bald-faced lies? Not gonna happen.

[dreamnightwind]

82. I saw the whore post

Don't have a link to it, so mostly what I remember is my impression of it.

IIRC it was about her being a whore to corporate interests (a fairly common use of the whore term) and it was of course blown up for being misognyist.

It is difficult to discern anyone's intent when they say such things, and I view it as an unfortunate choice of words that was intended to provoke but not to be misogynist. I remember thinking that the poster's point was valid and could have been made just as well with a different word.

I can't remember if the post was hiddedn or if the poster was banned. It's not worth much energy, really, the post was made so don't refute its existence, and tread carefully around anything that could be spun as misogynist, correct intentions are not enough if something can be credibly (and how credibly depends on what jury you get) spun another way.

[AlbertCat]

83. the post was made so don't refute its existence,

I don't.

But Sanders' supporters as a group aren't responsible, whatever went on.

[dreamnightwind]

88. Right, and its apparent intent, to me, was not misogynist

But it isn't worth defending, and I'd have to see it again to be sure how to feel about it, anyway as you say it was one unfortunate post.

I happen to agree with where it was coming from, though, the main reason I can't support Hillary is that she is basically corporate interests in Democratic clothing.

[Enthusiast]

54. I was kicked out. I posted without being aware I was posting on the Hillary group.

The OP must have been on the DU front page. What I said was not all that bad. My remark certainly wasn't about Benghazi or e-mails or anything of that nature.

[broiles]

47. I'm blocked from the Hillary group and my life has never been the same.

Just kidding. I clicked on a post in GD and commented that I couldn't support Hillary because she was a hawk. Boom, the next thing I know, I'm informed that I'm blocked from the Hillary group that I didn't even know I was in. If you don't want to hear comments from those who disagree with you, you shouldn't be posted in GD.

[NRaleighLiberal]

2. extremely touchy and defensive. really baffling, to tell the truth.

[arcane1]

18. I knew we were going to have a problem when the "H" logo came out, and some people didn't like it

Wow, were the attacks on those people something else! And many of them supported Clinton but just didn't like the logo.

That's when I knew it was going to be... interesting, to say the least!

[clydefrand]

4. It is like someone(s) on DU doesn't

like the truth about a lot of things. I don't know who stops so many post here,
but they must be b----ts of some kind.

[RobertEarl]

5. That group is a snake pit

And I like snakes. But I know better than to stick my head in any snake pit. Let them be. In fact, the members there are a true minority that we should coddle and comfort, for they know not what they do.

[djean111]

6. To be fair, I don't appreciate Hillary supporters posting in the Bernie group.

Never been on a jury for that sort of thing, though.
Anyway, I think of the groups as safe havens. If someone wants to ask a (usually loaded) question, why not do the in GD-P, is my thought. Get more visibility there, too!

[merrily]

10. We seem to be in the minority, but I agree with you. Safe haven is safe haven. Or should be.

[awoke_in_2003]

72. The safe haven idea for candidates is ridiculous...

I can understand safe havens for oppressed groups (African Americans, LGBT, Atheist/Agnostic), but a place for supporters to be able to hear an echo chamber and hear NO discussion that is not lock step is ridiculous. Bernie and Hillary are not oppressed people.

[merrily]

90. In your opinion. However, groups are not only for oppressed people.

Every state has one, there is a photography group, etc.

Moreover, AFAIK, neither Bernie nor Hillary post here, so whether they are oppressed is an odd thing to bring up.

The idea, I assume, is that there should be places on the board where a poster can be enthusiastic about someone or something without having to argue over it. Or discuss something, maybe plan actio, without having a thread hijacked. I don't know why any adult has a problem with that. There are plenty of other places on the board where anyone can post whatever he or she wants about any topic, subject only to juries. Why that is not enough, I have no idea.

But, you're wasting your time on me. Skinner decided to create groups long before I started posting at DU, so it has nothing to do with me. Apparently he thought safe haven groups were not ridiculous. You can debate it with him in ATA.

[artislife]

94. I am with you on this one...nt

[L0oniX]

37. They troll this group and alert a lot. I just ignored another one.

[djean111]

48. Yeah, I know they do that. I am totally mystified by that - it makes no sense,

really. Like mean girls in seventh grade. Has nothing to do with the candidates, methinks, but maybe with thwarted expectations of immediate victory or something?

[L0oniX]

52. I only respond to SOP alerts from those that post in this group. Even then it's subjective...

as to whether or a post is acceptable even if it does not follow the SOP exactly. I would make allowance for an op that may read like meta if the thread is going well. I mean we can discuss issues related to the group, the group members and their experiences outside the group.

[A Simple Game]

67. There should be no political safe havens, everything and everyone concerning politics

should be open for discussion. Otherwise why name the group Democratic Underground? Yes I know the capital D means it refers to the political party but the word means more than just a political party.

From Dictionary.com

Democratic
adjective
1.
pertaining to or of the nature of democracy or a democracy.
2.
pertaining to or characterized by the principle of political or social equality for all:
democratic treatment.
3.
advocating or upholding democracy.
4.
(initial capital letter) Politics.
of, relating to, or characteristic of the Democratic Party.
of, relating to, or belonging to the Democratic-Republican Party.

[Wellstone ruled]

7. Yup,and the dude that laid the Hammer on me should talk.

Are they that thinned skinned? This Guy has and will always back whom ever our Party Names As Their Candidate. Let's get real over at HRC what ever they call themselves site.

[Dont call me Shirley]

8. I just try to stay out of the fray.

[enlightenment]

21. I'll second this.

Don't post nearly as much as I think and say in RL, because I don't want to wind up having to defend myself for no reason.

It's always divisive during primary season; but increasingly nasty. I think I'd rather engage in Shrovetide football.

[merrily]

9. I agree with you on Bernie's being better than JFK. As to RFK and Ted--hard for me to know.

I've never heard of Bernie's birthday cruises before. Wish I had! This year, though, it's the September 8 birthday money bomb.

Unlike many here, I am a fan of safe haven groups. For me, it's nice to have a place on DU where arguing is not an issue. I don't much like it when a Hillary supporter posts here.

I can't say any of the above qualifies as an insight. It's just how I feel.

[gregcrawford]

16. I was unaware of the "Safe Haven" thing...

... but if there are other forums in which alternative views can be expressed, then I will honor it. It just seems that a closed feedback loop might be counter-productive in the long run, but whatever. Life is too short to argue with closed minds, so the Hillarites are welcome to their safe haven. I won't bother them again. I will, however, be magnanimous in offering sympathy when they lose!

[merrily]

20. Every group, including this one and the Hillary Clinton Group, are described thusly:

This is a group, not a forum. Groups often serve as safe havens for members who share similar interests and viewpoints. Individuals who post messages contrary to a particular group's stated purpose can be excluded from posting in that group. For detailed information about this group and its purpose, click here.

The hosts of each group write up a statement of purpose for the group and post it. Groups for individual Democrats are generally seen as places to praise that Democrat.

[gregcrawford]

26. Hi Merrily

I tried to click on the link, but nuthin' happened. As I said, it was blissful ignorance on my part regarding group protocols, and I will honor the code of conduct, whatever it is. I'll even offer a mea culpa to the HRC group, if it's deemed appropriate, though I still think their unpleasantness was a bit over the top.

Both my wife and I sport "Bernie" stickers on our vehicles, and we have contributed to his campaign. I've also done a few editorial cartoons in support of Bernie, all of which have appeared in Good Reads, so I think I will pass the loyalty test!

[sabrina 1]

49. Don't worry about it. Lots of people accidentally wander into 'safe haven' groups because they see

the threads among the latest that are posted. It would be nice to simply tell a person who has clearly unknowingly wandered into a Group that is protected, that they are in a Group that is a safe haven. Most people when they are told this, will simply apologize and delete their comment.

But to just ban someone who has made that mistake without telling them where they are, isn't very nice imo.

[merrily]

102. ? If you mean you tried to click on the link in my post, there is no link in my post.

For each group, there is the same language, but a different link. I was making a general statement about all groups so I did not include any link.

For the Hillary Group, you would have to click on the link near the top of this page: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1107

Clicking on that link would take you to this page: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1107

I am not sure where the detailed Hillary group's statement of purpose is.

Your support of Bernie is fine for this group, but would not pass the loyalty test for the Hillary Group. I thought you were objecting to how the Hillary Group treated you.

For the Sanders Group: click on the link near the top of this page: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1280

Clicking on that link takes you to this page: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1280

The detailed statement of purpose for the Sanders Group is here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12805067

[AlbertCat]

56. are described thusly:

None of that excuses absurd cultish behavior.

If a Hillary supporter has a question about Sanders, or even a joke.... let 'em post here. If they actually seem to be trolling, fine... ask them not to or get banned. But just banning people on their 1st post that is actually inoffensive but maybe not doting is childish and unproductive. What if someone wanted to know something about Clinton. Would you go to the Hillary group to ask and find out?

And indeed, if they can't take the heat, why are their posts offered in GD or GT?

[smokey nj]

62. GD-Pee would be the appropriate forum.

If you don't support Hillary, stay out of that group.

[HassleCat]

11. Banned, banned and banned again

My first ban was from the Sanders group because I got all excited about the "socialist" thing, but that was my fault, and I straightened it out with the hosts. Then I got banned from the Obama group, not because I said anything about Obama, but because I suggested some of his best supporters could sometimes criticize specific things he does. Then I got banned from the Clinton group because I made a joke about their attempt at rationalizing all the donations from financial interests. As I understand the groups, all it takes is one of the hosts to misunderstand something you say, and you're gone.

Anyway, I agree with you abut Sanders. I am just amazed we have a presidential contender who is so right on so many issues important to me. I have been a democratic socialist for 35 years, and I never thought we would see a democratic socialist and a real progressive making a serious run at the presidency.

[L0oniX]

36. If it was a misunderstanding we unblock.

[monmouth4]

13. I was not allowed back there quite a while ago. Since the admins. have declared their early

preference for Hillary I doubt we can get much help from them....

[Cry]

14. I like you!

[gregcrawford]

17. Thanks! I'm a relative newbie, compared to many on DU...

... who seem to have been here since the invention of the wheel, but let me be the first to welcome you!

[arcane1]

15. Don't take that group seriously. They're desperate, and closing that bubble more each day.

Today Sanders is responsible for Congress' low approval rating

[gregcrawford]

19. Oh boy, really?

SOMEBODY'S off their meds!

[merrily]

22. In that group of 535, there's always ONE who makes it suck. And, of course, it's the most

liberal one, who else? Everyone knows how much Americans hate Social Security, Medicare and free public colleges!

[Dont call me Shirley]

32. Oh so Congess's low popularity is because of sanders, now. Not because of the do nothing GOP..

that's my laugh of the day.

Bernie's pulling in crowds of up to 28,000 and he's the unpopular one.

[arcane1]

34. Part of that damned do-nothing congress!

Though I'm sure they were called that when a certain other candidate was in there.

[L0oniX]

35. BERNIE SANDERS MADE MY BABY CRY!

[arcane1]

40. Did your baby see what he does to cows?

[L0oniX]

43. Oh noes ...not the cow tipping scandal again.

[gregcrawford]

51. HA!

I worked on a couple of farms when I was a kid, and no one I knew was ever successful in "tipping" a cow! And some of those older farm hands could bench press a Volkswagen! Depending on the breed, they weigh in at nearly half a ton on average. Never could figure out how that myth got started. I got kicked for my trouble the first and only time I tried it. Woulda broke my leg if I wasn't in mid-hop to get away from her! Took me a couple of weeks of forehead skritches to get back in her good graces.

[Mbrow]

61. Ah the good old forehead skirtch!

workes on all sorts...... I wonder if it works on HRC supporters? Just a thought

[onecaliberal]

23. I've trashed everything they write.

[ColesCountyDem]

24. Not slamming you personally, but your comment wasn't very innocuous.

Groups are 'safe havens', and the group may be anywhere between 'quite open to discussion' to 'zero tolerance of anything remotely critical'. Any comment is judged by the group host or hosts, and their judgment need be neither objective, nor tolerant.

[gregcrawford]

28. As I said to merrily...

... I was ignorant of the protocols regarding groups, but now that I know, I will honor those restrictions. I will say, however, that the HRC group seemed like they were more interested in vilifying Sanders supporters than in expressing support for Hillary.

[ColesCountyDem]

30. There are several groups that are quite 'touchy'.

I started posting in a 'greatest' thread that originated in a group quite some time ago, and didn't notice that it had originated in a group. I saw a blatantly, factually incorrect statement and called the person on it. They doubled down, so I posted a link proving the statement was incorrect. BOOM, I was banned!

It happens.

[gregcrawford]

31. As FDR said of the banksters that tried to overthow him...

... I welcome their hatred!

[passiveporcupine]

42. And what exactly is everyone doing in this thread?

Supporting Sanders?

We aren't any different from them, we just support a different (better ) candidate.

We shouldn't be using this group to bash anyone else. It's not helpful to the overall antagonism that is raging between the two groups now.

I understand that people get upset when they are banned, but threads like this need to stop. I'm not trying to make anyone uncomfortable, or feel guilty...it's just not helping anything to keep this going, and it's a bit ironic that the same thing happens here that we complain about over there.

Come on guys...we are better than this. They are DU members too.

Was it a thread here where I read this, or a video clip, or maybe a recent movie...but try to think of everyone you talk to (about) as if today is their last day to live. Would you treat them the same way?

I'm not angel, and I have to watch what I say all the time. You wouldn't believe how many posts I delete instead of hitting "post my reply".

[Unknown Beatle]

68. It's also good to vent once in a while.

And the poster wasn't aware it was a "Safe Haven".

Do you think someone, anyone, on DU should be called out if they lie? I've seen Hillary supporters constantly lie about Bernie. I haven't seen any Bernie supporters lie about Hillary, at least not that I'm aware of.

I wouldn't call it 'bashing', it's calling them out on a lie.

[passiveporcupine]

78. I know he was unaware it was a safe haven

And i'm ignoring that point. But there are a number of pretty ugly comments in this thread, like:

I don't know who stops so many post here,
but they must be b----ts of some kind.

That group is a snake pit

And I like snakes. But I know better than to stick my head in any snake pit. Let them be. In fact, the members there are a true minority that we should coddle and comfort, for they know not what they do.

Like mean girls in seventh grade.

Life is too short to argue with closed minds, so the Hillarites are welcome to their safe haven.

None of that excuses absurd cultish behavior.

Don't take that group seriously. They're desperate, and closing that bubble more each day.

SOMEBODY'S off their meds!

there's always ONE who makes it suck.

Now stop and think about how we would feel if these comments had been directed at us...in a private group, where we could not respond, but we see and read them on the main page. It's because they are open to us to read that makes me think we should limit some of this stuff, knowing they can read it and not respond.

Now to your second questions. If somebody says a lie about Bernie, yes...by all means, confront them. But not in their private group. We aren't supposed to go there and do that.

And if you have a complaint about any one poster over something they say, my personal moral rule is I confront them directly, I don't try to talk about them behind their back. That is the part that is childish and passive aggressive. Be honest with people, even if they may not want to hear what you have to say. To their face.

I have to watch myself all the time and I screw up, but I know how I feel if someone is talking about me behind my back, or putting words in my mouth, or saying nasty things about me.

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

With a grain of salt...we are human. But it might bring the rage levels down a little if we showed each other a little respect. And yes, sometimes we need to vent, but we don't need to denigrate people while we do it.

Now I'm going to take my halo off and go swear at my dogs or something...this goodie two shoes crap is just too gooey for me.

[Snotcicles]

27. I for one like the fact that to quench their desire to justify their poor candidate choice

the only recourse they have is to conjure up offenses made by people and circumstances Bernie has no control of.
It must be tough to endure the daily humiliation of your oppositions meteoric gains in popular opinion. In spite of the hard work
of contorting trite and insignificant events into grandiose campaign ending anomalies. How do they endure? there just seems to be no obvious gratification for the tremendous effort that is repeatedly squandered. Or is it all in a days work?

[Motown_Johnny]

29. If you aren't an echo, stay out of the chamber.

Pledge your unquestioning loyalty or you are not one of them. No biggie. Don't take it personally.

I'm banned there too.

[L0oniX]

33. Unsurpringly I just got an alert from someone who is from the Hillary group. Trolls be a troll'n.

[Le Taz Hot]

74. Fee fees hurt again?

They are a touchy bunch, aren't they?

[fbc]

38. It's funny that Hillary group posts need huge warning labels if they ever make it to the front page.

WARNING: HILLARY GROUP POST

WARNING: HILLARY GROUP POST

WARNING: HILLARY GROUP POST

[MissDeeds]

45. Yeah, it's absurd

Last edited Sat Aug 29, 2015, 05:34 PM - Edit history (1)

It's like sending out a warning shot that no one who has a question or dissenting opinion will be tolerated. Fall in line because, you know, it's her time. Bite me. As someone posted earlier today, she's running for the nomination for the presidency of the United States - if she can't handle the heat, she better bow out now.

She isn't willing to appear at public events that haven't been screened, isn't willing to answer questions from media, and is unwilling to have more debates because she can't handle it - and she is abysmal at debating. It seems that we are all supposed to shut up and elect her because she's the chosen one. I don't see that happening.

[The_Commonist]

39. I don't think I've been banned yet from the HRC group...

I'll have to do something about that, pronto!

[Old Crow]

63. Ha ha ha! This post of yours made me laugh. :)

Getting banned over there should be a piece of cake.

Come back and tell us how it went.

[turbinetree]

41. Yes......................................

I also got blocked to respond to two comments
I also now wear it as a badge of honor and I will also equate those feeling just like Bernie has done, it is about the ISSUES and enough is enough

And as a bleeding heart liberal democratic-socialist progressive I am honored to have him run in this campaign ------------------

and will do my part to make sure that the grassroots and the party give this country the best democratic candidate


FEEL THE BERN-------------------------YEP



Honk-----------for a political revolution Bernie 2016

[Spitfire of ATJ]

44. I see the same group from the Swamp have headed for the Hills.

[hfojvt]

53. now that is some funny excrement right there

I clicked on this thread as it was displayed on the home page of DU. Somehow I assumed it was a thread in GD.

Much to my surprise, it is in the Bernie Sanders group - a place I have never gone on purpose.

As for malice all over DU. One funny thing about it, unless it is YOUR eye getting poked, you often do not notice a stick named at various eyes. I noticed that myself with Obama. When I was an Obama defender it seemed to me that the Obama haters were very obnoxious. When I switched to being an Obama hater myself, then it seemed like the Obama defenders were very obnoxious. Yet probably nothing had changed except MY perception.

[Deadshot]

57. I agree.

I don't think protective haven posts should go on the "greatest threads" or "trending now" pages.

[Fuddnik]

58. It's just a reincarnation of the BOG.

Dissent and discussion is not tolerated.

I got tossed from the BOG after one innocuous post, that I found on the greatest page.

I'd put most of them on ignore if it weren't for the comedic value.

[davidpdx]

87. The BOG, AA, and Hillary Clinton groups have pretty much become one big clic

The morale of the story is avoid safe haven groups unless you think you are one of them.

[Old Crow]

59. Yup. I'm banned from the Hillary group.

I'm considering using the signature line "Proudly banned from the Hillary group since June 9, 2015!"

In my case, I was responding to a post that came up on the main page. I didn't know it was the Hillary group. It was a rather weird graphic of Hillary, with one eye covered by a star. It brought to mine that image of the Terminator, where one eye is replaced with a glowing red orb. So I post a photo of the Terminator without comment and boom! ... I was banned.

It was my mistake and I shouldn't have posted it. I'm big enough to admit I was in the wrong. But yes, they are incredibly thin-skinned over there and they will ban anyone who so much as hiccups inappropriately.

[carolinayellowdog]

60. Malice "all over DU" is projection IMO

My ignore list includes anyone who makes a point of being rude, aggressive, and dogmatic, and it seems to be about evenly divided between supporters of the two leading candidates. But one of these groups is 4-5 times larger than the other overall, which suggests that the rudeness per capita is only 20-25% as problematic. More to the point is that there are very many friendly and non-aggressive people I've admired for years here who have become outspoken Sanders supporters, which I can't say about those of any other candidate.

[Old Crow]

64. Interesting observations re: "rudeness per capita."

Smart. Thanks for sharing.

[Milliesmom]

65. Me too!

I didn't realize I was in the Hillary group and they posted a list of her endorsers, I made the comment,

"We have work to do for Bernie"

William 769 posted to me, " You can go do it someplace else." and then he had me blocked.???????????
They are just being nasty, sadly people need to realize we all are trying to elect a Democrat

[rosesaylavee]

66. Groups are not meant to be places for debate

for hearing opposing viewpoints -- much as this group's statement says:

Groups often serve as safe havens for members who share similar interests and viewpoints.

Would you like some one from the Clinton Group to come in here and give you an opposing point of view as no doubt you haven't thought of something like what they have to say before. I don't think so. Maybe you haven't been around here for long, but that's the rule here. Groups are safe havens. If you are NOT a Hilary person, don't go there to recruit for Sanders.

BTW, not a Hilary supporter -- leaning heavily toward Bernie. But having spent 10 years on this site, learned not to do that thing you just did.

[Old Crow]

69. I agree with you.

That said, I think it would be an improvement if DU excluded posts made in safe havens from the main page. People see something there and post a response without realizing they're posting in a safe haven. It happens time and time again.

[rosesaylavee]

71. Yes, that would eliminate a lot of drama here. eom

[MisterP]

86. that'd hold true--if none of the other groups had so many blocks as those particular sandboxes

[gregcrawford]

70. I never intended to spark a firestorm, honest!

Loonix was kind enough to give me a heads-up that someone was alerting on my OP, "I'm curious..." in which I asked those in the Bernie group for advice after being blocked from the HRC group for not knowing I was in the HRC group when I offered a comment. It would appear that I saw the warning too late. I missed the fine print about Statement of Purpose, whatever that is, but for the life of me, I can't see anything in my post to the Bernie group that could offend anyone that much. What on Earth is going on here?

[Old Crow]

76. The touchiness on DU right now is over-the-top.

Until we get past the primary and the Democratic candidate is determined, this rather bizarre state of affairs will continue. People get amazingly partisan and petty. About 20 people are responsible for most of the partisan sniping, it seems. (For obvious reasons, I'm not naming names.) The best thing to do is just ignore the nonsense as best you can, otherwise you're liable to get caught up in it. Try to stay focused on facts and do your best to avoid any kind of disparaging remarks about individuals or groups.

[gregcrawford]

77. As I said to someone else a few minutes ago...

... I think I'll just post my cartoons every Sunday and stay the hell out of these fraternal knife fights. I'm one squillion percent for Bernie, but too many comments can't be unsaid, and too many bridges are being burned, and for what?

But thanks for the good advice. I'm hungry. Later...

[eridani]

73. Part of the problem with getting blocked is that people often don't notice that they are--

--in protected groups. I used to go to the Hillary group occasionally when a favorable article about her got forwarded to me, but I got blocked for not noticing that my response was to a post in a protected group.

[SoapBox]

75. If you are not for her...marching like a Zombie...

Then you are labeled as being against her.

Period.

[mahina]

79. I don't even say anything nice about her.

Will do so in real life, standing up for her against misguided folks who think tearing her down lifts anybody else up. But on DU, it's just not worth it.

[MelissaB]

80. I just got blocked as well.

I didn't realize you could post anything you wanted to in a group, but other supporters couldn't respond. Fuck it! I have tried to be nice, but not more. Washing my hands of Hillary and her supporters.

[Not a Fan]

81. The vitriol

I will take either candidate - whoever wins the primary is fine by me - though I will be voting for Bernie. But I think they are both wonderful options and since I cannot personally decide who will win I spend my time supporting both of them on social media. The Supreme Court is at risk. NO ONE gets bad mouthed. That being said ....

I am active at a number of political fb sites (not candidate sites) ... and though I saw my first (outrageously stupid) derogatory comment about Bernie today - I see them by the handful every day regarding Hillary.

I see the F word and the W word. Someone said if she were starving they would S*** in her mouth. (Happily a moderator took that one down.) I saw her called the bloody red queen. Aside from that bs I see nonstop vitriol directed at her. And it's not merely a comment here and there - but often entire angry paragraphs full of talking point style insults dripping with hate.

I think most of these people are young and were wearing diapers while the Arkansas Project was in full swing. They have no context of the overall years-long political situation when it comes to the Clintons. I tried to engage a few times, but they can't be reached I've found. No one is going to take their hate away from them!

I'm also at odds with an old fb acquaintance because he seems to think it's his personal job to take Hillary down. To that end he spams any post I have in which Hillary is a factor. That hasn't happened in a few days - not since a few other friends jumped into the fray.

A friend who is a moderator for a few different fb pages contacted me in a message to tell me that moderators (they have their own page to chat) had been having to block this person because of his spamming habits. He saw we were "friends" and wanted to warn me. This is one of my best and oldest fb acquaintances - we've never had a conflict in all the time I've known him and now he's turning into a monster.

I see people comment with regularity that they will NEVER vote for Hillary. I've never seen anyone say that about Bernie.

I think it's gotten very ugly and that it may only get worse. Heaven help us if we can't all pull together for the general election.

[gregcrawford]

84. I, too, am very sorry to see such malice...

... but I've been following politics for more decades than I care to count, and I've seen some very disturbing patterns emerging here. I am beginning to think both sides are being played here, BIG time, and set against one another by third parties. It's happened before, but social media provide an especially fertile field for such skulduggery. Younglings would not know about it, but old warhorses like me do. And old warhorses are not to be trifled with.

When I find out more, I'll let you know. But lovers of both Hillary and Bernie must NOT lose sight of the fact that we are ultimately all on the same side. There will be nothing left of DU in the end if we do forget that very important fact.

I've said many times that I will support whoever wins the nomination, and I am suspicious of anyone who says otherwise. There is too much at stake.

I wouldn't trust a Republican any further than I can throw my truck, and anyone who remembers how Karl Rove got his first job, as I do, would do well to pause in this internecine squabbling until we ferret out the REAL cause of this conflict.

[Not a Fan]

85. Who's really posting?

I have heard that conservatives have a strong social media presence posting liberal-style memes that are designed to play the two sides against one another.

I've seen a few I suspect - but what I mostly see is anger-driven comments. They are also suspect.

[Eko]

89. This is downright despicable and repugnant.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=553572

[Autumn]

95. No it really isn't. It a satirical response to Hillary's stance on cluster bombs.

[Autumn]

100. Want to clue me in as to why pointing out Hillary's support for cluster bombs

in a satirical way is downright despicable and repugnant? I always find myself getting suspicious when I see a poster who says they support Sanders but they sure don't like Sanders supporters pointing out faults or problems with Hillary's stand on some issues. As a host here I would like a response to my question. I consider your post to be an attack on a member of our group.

[muriel_volestrangler]

91. Hosts in both major candidate groups are blocking people very quickly

One of the hosts in this group wanted to block someone before they'd even posted in the group! See http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598495

Thankfully, that host didn't understand they were unable to do that.

[Autumn]

96. The host had that poster confused with someone else.

I don't think we are blocking people very quickly. One person I blocked had posted in a couple of different threads and and had 12 exchanges with the host who was informing him that this was a protected group. In some groups 1 post is all it takes

[PowerToThePeople]

92. It happens

I got banned and never said anything negative about her or her campaign in that group.

[artislife]

93. Don't go in

Best not to post. If you want to engage in a discussion, take it to GDP.

I read there twice a month, maybe. Just to get a feel for what they are happy about or sad about. But I would never post there, I don't agree with their choice, but it is their piece of the site where they can gush about her. This is ours. O'Malley has his.

Respect it.

[gregcrawford]

97. It would appear...

... that many people have done what I did. I clicked on a headline on the front page under Trending Now, and responded to a fairly angry post about Bernie supporters without realizing that I had trespassed into a protected group. Things went downhill from there.

Maybe a skull-and-crossbones warning of some sort would help to prevent inadvertent transgressions of this sort from happening in the future.

I wanted to apologize for my mistake, but of course, I couldn't post there after being blocked.

I have been advised not to complain about another group, which I will certainly honor, but is it not incumbent on others to extend the same courtesy to the Bernie group? That has most definitely not been the case in my experience.

In my humble opinion, these fraternal knife fights are creating a toxic atmosphere that will be difficult to overcome when primaries and elections have come and gone. Whither goest we then?

[artislife]

99. It is true

I think everyone is tired of the other's supporters, no matter where we fall.

There have been a few posts asking if the groups OPs be omitted from the Latest or Greatest page, so people don't unintentionally step on anyone's toes.

I come into GDP automatically, when I come into to the site. This way, when I go to Latest and Greatest, I am aware to check on the origin of the OP.

Apologizing at this point will be met with some sympathetic ears but probably more doubt that you weren't aware. The fatigue has already set in.

Make your case in the GDP, but don't be surprised if it sinks..


Sorry, you are probably a descent person and this hurts, but this inter web thingy is tough sometimes!

[Disabled15]

101. New to DU

I learned from this thread, thanks for that. But, I'm also even more confused. I have to go back to reading stuff for the newbies.
I am a positive person that supports ideas and does not intentionally put others down. Part of why I like Bernie so much (aside from his great ideas), he is a class act. Never talking bad about other politicians. I've never heard others say, "our Republican friends..." Even if you disagree with his ideas, you have to admit he's a nice guy who respects people.
Thanks for letting me know about banning. I have a lot to learn!

[rosesaylavee]

103. Welcome to DU!

Unfortunately you came in at a time when an election is brewing. You will see a lot of trolls masquerading as Bernie supporters and Hillary supporters, saying things that neither candidate would approve of and/or support. It will take some time to work it out, but it's worth the stay as you will get info here you may not see elsewhere. You just have to wade a bit in to see it. Don't take everything here at face value, use your judgment. And otherwise, enjoy!

[LWolf]

104. Good lord.

Having never ventured into that place, I took a peek.

I was surprised to see that they spend as much or more time talking about Sanders and his supporters as they do talking about HRC and her campaign.