I am posting this on this General Discussion: Primaries board because this is really my intended audience, with so much ugliness, hatred and acrimony occurring on this board
between fellow Democrats on a daily basis. (But for all reference, I am also cross-posting this on General Discussion).
Trivial posts are fine. I have nothing against trivial posts. I don't think everytime we post here we need to write a great dissertation on the current state of politics in this country. Some of us have limited schedule and access and don't have time for such deep insight.
But in the end, much of what we post is fluff. It is not intended to stimulate great thought. It is just a shout-out of whatever shallow thoughts are on our minds. And we need to recognize it as light fluff.
However, due to the heated state of affairs, with passions at a peak and a virtual civil war going on between the supporters of our two candidates (both of whom I respect and will vote for, by the way), people are getting a little overboard. They are either writing simple posts for the sheer purpose of getting recommendations, or putting out trivial or nonsensical posts that other supporters of the candidate choose nonetheless to recommend
only because the poster is on their side.
Two days ago, in order to prove a point, I posted a picture of a waterskiing squirrel:
and asked posters to recommend it just because. I did this not only just to have a little fun and lighten the mood, but also prove a point. Because some of the posts here ("Barack Obama is a loser!" or "Hillary Clinton laughs weird") are so vapid in putting forward any original or deep thought that they are about as deep and insightful as a picture of a waterskiing squirrel. Yet these posts will be recommended by supporters of whatever candidate just because they they manage to bash the other candidate.
Therefore, I am calling for a new distinction on Democratic Underground. Whenever a frivilous, meritless or meaningless post is excessively and unjustifiably recommended for no other reason than the fact it tears down another candidate, I say we should respond by giving the offending post a "Squirrel Award". This can be done simply by putting "Squirrel Award" in the response title, and if you feel so motivated, a picture of a squirrel like this:
or a similar picture of our favorite tree dwelling, fuzzy tailed rodent.
There must be ground rules, of course. And here is what I propose:
1. Squirrel Awards are
not meant to be awarded just because you disagree with the thread or the candidate it is directed towards or against. Any post that provides at least something of an intelligent purpose or thought to it is not deserving of a squirrel award. There must be a high burden of proof needed for a Squirrel Award to be issued.
2. The post should have at least ten (10) recommendations to be given a squirrel award. Anything recommendations below 10 are just a freak of nature and are recognized by the vast majority of board members as being meaningless fluff. However, once double digits are hit, the stage is set for a squirrel award.
3. There are four (4) types of posts that are deserving of a squirrel award:
a. Posts which within their title ask board members to "Recommend this post if you think . . . "
These are at the least self-serving, and at the most, just plain stupid and annoying.
b. Posts which are nothing but an ad hominiem attack on a candidate or person without going into
further substance.
c. Posts which are overly hysterical and excessively emotional to the point where they are deserving
of ridicule. Example: posts titled "I F_____G HATE HIM/HER!!!!!!!!"
d. Posts which contain a minimum of at least five (5) words capitalized for no particular reason.
4. For supporters of both candidates, I ask that you be self-policing. If a Hillary supporter makes a stupid, meaningless post, I ask Hillary supporters in the interest of their candidate to give that poster a Squirrel Award. If an Obama supporter launches into a unnecessary ad hominim attack on Hillary, I ask that Obama supporters join in and give that offender a Squirrel Award. The purpose of the squirrel award is
not to add more fuel to the fire of the Obama v. Clinton DU civil war. Rather, it is to dissuade from recommendation of unworthy posts and save such distinction for posters who have taken the time and effort to write something rational, reasonable and intelligent.
If your post is one that is unlucky enough to get a Squirrel Award, you may either feel humbled or you may relish in the distinction. That's all up to you. But the squirrel is ever vigliant, my friend.
Finally, if this post of mine gets at least ten (10) recommendations, feel free to award me a Squirrel Award. :)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
