Why was Brooklynite kicked off of this site? nt

[Funtatlaguy]

This discussion thread was locked by EarlG (a host of the General Discussion forum).

NT

[Ocelot II]

1. He was?

[Funtatlaguy]

6. According to several posters, yes.

[Prairie Gates]

11. FFR'd...check his profile

Gone but not forgotten...

[Alliepoo]

72. What does FFR'd mean?

[Marthe48]

89. I looked at terms of service

I saw follow forum rules, which doesn't work for me

Maybe 'for further review' ? or 'flagged for review' ?

I hope someone will refresh my memory

[Prairie Gates]

106. Flagged for Review

For all intents and purposes, it's the end for a poster. Occasionally there is a review and the poster is re-admitted, but it's rare. I'd say chances are about even for this poster, since he was a member since 2002, had 96,000+ posts, and is generally known to all posters and admins since he posts 30-60 posts a day.

[pwb]

2. He rubbed people the wrong way?

IMO.

[Polybius]

37. He's misunderstood

He's an extremely loyal Party insider that sometimes tells the hard truth. I know for a fact that he wants Democrats to win.

[pwb]

40. To each his own I guess.

I had him on ignore for a long time.

[Xavier Breath]

60. Same. n/t

[XanaDUer2]

110. Same

Nt

[RussBLib]

168. As did I. Nt

[TwilightZone]

88. Agreed.

"Kill the messenger" comes to mind. Not always, but also not infrequently.

[sop]

79. He spoke power to truth.

[Prairie Gates]

108. Perfection

[obamanut2012]

80. Agreed

Very elitist

[GPV]

3. Wait, what?

[DURHAM D]

4. Too many hidden posts. nt

[LuckyCharms]

5. Looks like he got 5 hides in less than 90 days?

I don't know...I don't think I saw any of his posts that got hidden.

[Funtatlaguy]

9. Is that a rule?

[LuckyCharms]

13. Yes. n/t

[Prairie Gates]

18. Yes, that's the long-standing jury rule that has gotten a lot of posters FFR'd

[krawhitham]

77. Yes and it makes it's pretty easy to get rid of someone if you want

[Prairie Gates]

92. How so?

Juries are chosen through a thoughtful process and are mostly random. Getting five posts hidden in 90 days is tough.

[Celerity]

36. He has been FFR'd before and was let back in, a couple of years ago, if memory serves.

[Prairie Gates]

63. Hard to get FFR'd twice

A lot of DUers have never had a single post hidden ever.

[TwilightZone]

71. Not that hard.

If you get a 5th hide, you're FFR'd. You can appeal the hide. If the appeal is successful, you're back to 4. Another is the second FFR. That appears to be what happened here.

In the past, a lot of people have been allowed to return and later got booted again. It tends to happen more during and after heated primaries, like 2020.

[Prairie Gates]

87. Five hidden posts in 90 days is a lot

It means the members of the community (selected through a pretty thoughtful process) found one to be out of line five separate times in three months. That's bad. Then there are even appeals, as you say, so it could even be more than five times! The jury and FFR system is based on the idea that you should be able to interact with others in a way that avoids being out of line five times in 90 days. That's a high threshhold to be on the wrong side of, in my view. To be FFR'd, beg for re-entry, be admitted re-entry, and then FFR'd again? At some point, that's a sign of a problem poster.

[TwilightZone]

122. Eh, depends.

Sure, five is a lot - plenty, really - but prolific posters have more content to judge, and he was quite definitely a prolific poster.

He was also a target, for a variety of reasons, some of his own making. Being a contrarian is a bit risky on DU. There's also some "kill the messenger" involved, and he tended to push the boundaries perhaps a bit more than was wise on occasion. We are a bit insulated from reality here on DU (by design), and breaking that wall can push a lot of buttons.

As I noted in another post, I'm not surprised but I also think there's more to the story than just a problem poster, as you termed it.

[Sympthsical]

125. Not really. Just have the unpopular opinion

Things rack up very quickly if it's a busy, volatile topic.

I've been called non-stop over the past two weeks, and I'm wracking my brain to recall a single instance that involved actual rule-breaking. It was almost entirely, "I don't like this person's opinion or what they're saying." Sometimes it was literally just a link to articles from notoriously right-wing evangelical websites like . . . NBC News.

It's just how it is. It's also resulting in a hilariously weird situation where the average Democratic voter would probably get yeeted from the space right now. That is pretty impressive to manage. And again, really, really funny.

[Prairie Gates]

144. Well, then I guess the jury system should itself be reviewed

If it's so easy to get people you don't like shitcanned from the site? It seems like a decent way to conduct forum moderation to me, and this poster seems to have lasted for quite some time, despite, as almost everyone on this thread seems to admit, some abrasive tendencies, or at least perceptions of abrasive tendencies.

[Sympthsical]

150. What cannot be done with wit may be accomplished by volume

Which is actually disturbingly salient to current political events just at the moment.

[Prairie Gates]

160. Ah

[DenaliDemocrat]

138. Depends

Sometimes a clique “hunts” you and reports everything trying to get hides. There was a group that was notorious for that.

[Prairie Gates]

149. Oh. Wow. Guess so

Seems like that would suggest some need for intervention or rethinking of the system.

[electric_blue68]

169. This is news to me. I don't think I saw those either.

[Prairie Gates]

7. Five hides in a given timeframe, like everybody else who gets FFR'd?

[LakeArenal]

127. A couple of long timers I know of beside Brookly.

In my opinion 5 posts removed is a sign of disrespect for other members.

[Prairie Gates]

147. Especially if they are erased after 90 days

It seems like if you get one or two, you'd realize that you need to reflect on your conduct and the way you are treating people. Five? I dunno. People upthread seem to think it's easy to get 5 in 90 days. Maybe so.

[fishwax]

8. if you get five posts hidden in 90 days your account is flagged for review, I believe

Looks like he got his fifth hide on Wednesday: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219173698

[Funtatlaguy]

15. Ok. Thanks.

[Brother Buzz]

66. Flagged for Review is like the Roach Motel®

You check in but you can't check out unless you get down on you knees and grovel to EarlG and beg forgiveness.

Used to be, you could sit out and wait for the hide to time out, but that was then, and this is now

I noticed Brooklynite had a target painted on his back for a long time, hovering around with three and four hides.

[demmiblue]

10. Doesn't play well with others?

Also not the first time.

[Polybius]

12. OMG, I was wondering what happened to him

He was my favorite poster.

[Funtatlaguy]

20. Mine too. Brought much insider info.

[Self Esteem]

27. Yes. He was very good at reminding us of that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. He was full of himself but he had access most of us don't have.

[obamanut2012]

101. How do you know that? You don't

We only know what he told us.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

131. Because i saw his linkedin page

If my memory is correct he had an executive job in a cable company. If he made everything up he would be a George Santos level fabulist.

[Phoenix61]

164. The only way to know who anyone is is to sit next to them

and watch them log onto their DU account. Everything else is based on what someone told you.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

171. There's a photo of him and the president on his twitter page.

Maybe he went to a rally, but normally you have to pony up a big donation to get that close to him.

[TwilightZone]

176. Nah, deductive reasoning can do the same.

If someone's identify is known and they have other public sites available to peruse (social media, etc), it's often not difficult at all to determine whether or not someone is who they say they are.

Also, convincingly pretending to be someone else for 22 years on a niche website discussion board isn't a likely scenario.

[Prairie Gates]

22. I'll bet

[Polybius]

42. Hehe

I follow him on X too.

[Prairie Gates]

44. I'll bet

[Mme. Defarge]

30. Moi aussi.

[we can do it]

14. Too many posts dissing regular voters?

[PuraVidaDreamin]

16. Ahhhhhhhh then

Fresh air

[unblock]

17. Profile just says flagged for review

[boston bean]

23. Can you link to his profile? I can't find it.

[Prairie Gates]

29. Here ya go

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=112524

[TwilightZone]

33. ...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=112524

For future reference, click the Search icon, then just type in the username and do a search. If you don't see the profile in the results, click on one of the posts and you can access it from there.

[LuckyCharms]

34. I think it's tough to get back in after FFR. But, it has happened. n/t

[unblock]

52. Yeah, not sure the process, I think you have to beg the admins nicely

Promise you won't do whatever it was that got you booted, etc.

They still probably make you wait a month or two anyway, I think I would, as a matter of policy.

Alternatively, they could create a fresh account, but they'd have to remain anonymous. That might be tough in this case as he seemed to relish posting insider info....

[calguy]

75. I got FFR'd by pissed off Bernie bros back in the day

It was a matter of a waiting period before my account was restored so that I could post again. Not sure if it was three or six months, but when my time in solitary was up, they let me back into the general population.

[boston bean]

19. Huh, really? I wasn't all that fond of the poster but I don't think he should be gone?

Edit. Username is brooklynite.

[Deuxcents]

21. Yes, why? He could be contrary at times but he usually made his point of view clear

And for me, made me think about a different angle to the discussion and stimulating conversation here is the point, right?

[Silent Type]

24. Apparently, he hit the 5 Hides. Sorry to read that.

[bluestarone]

25. He's one i enjoyed as well

Hope he returns.

[John1956PA]

26. From his posts, I got the impression that he was on business near my area.

Over the years, I enjoyed interacting with him. I look forward to him returning to DU.

[bigtree]

28. one too many name-drops, I think

...you're only allowed less than 10k humble brags about who you know in D.C circles, I believe.

[hatrack]

68. His very important connections, and the very important rumors he heard, and his very important donations . .

[Shrek]

31. Never good to lose a voice of sanity and wisdom

Especially now.

[edisdead]

35. Man I butted heads with him but FFR'd?

That seems harsh.

[Prairie Gates]

54. Five hides is five hides...doesn't matter how you get them

[Pisces]

38. That is crazy. We need to be able to debate without fear of being kicked off a democratic site during an

Election. We all have differing views. A poster who has been here forever and who has proven they have democratic values over new posters who most likely are here as disrupters???

[boston bean]

45. I agree here. Both points of view are coming from democrats.

To get hidden and kicked off for being one way or the other in alert wars is not very fair. It could happen to,anyone on either side.

[Pisces]

59. I agree, I have posted in the help section for some relaxation of rules during the election. These viewpoints

Are in the news daily. We should be able to have a healthy debate. I may be next to go.

[Sympthsical]

50. It wasn't even different views

It was just "Here's some factual information you may find unpleasant."

[Docreed2003]

136. 👆👆👆

All of this.

[Prairie Gates]

56. We either belive in the jury system or we don't

A lot of long time DUers have been FFR'd.

[JohnSJ]

170. True. Most people when they get a couple of hides cool it for a short time before re-engaging .

[ecstatic]

163. Yeah we probably need a GD-2024 forum right now

This situation is unprecedented. We are in late July in a presidential election year. I've been tuned in for 20 years and I've never seen this before.

We've had issues with the supporters of candidates, especially in 2016, but we've never had elected Democrats leading a revolt like this.

I don't think the reason for the revolt is as cut and dry as some DU members are saying. There's more to it. Things we don't know.

[oasis]

39. I learned a lot from his posting. Valuable insider.

The envy of his political connections by a few members here was quite obvious.

[Think. Again.]

41. Well, the TOS is very clear about SUPPORTING the Democratic party....

Posting negative-leaning stuff all the time with the excuse that "it's best to know the truth" wears thin after a while.

[gay texan]

47. It was a post nearly every 30 mins n/t

[Think. Again.]

53. And always with a negative twist to it.

[BeyondGeography]

159. And to think, so many positive things have been happening the past month

[Think. Again.]

165. Promoting negativity against Democrats goes against DU rules.

[BeyondGeography]

178. "Promoting negativity"

Right.

Brooklynite could get on my nerves but he was rarely dull and added value to this board, even if you didn’t always want to hear what he had to say. That was never “promoting negativity” as far as I was concerned.

[Polybius]

62. There's a fine line that he sometimes crossed, true

But a lot of it was due to motivation and hard truths that we sometimes don't like. He was more of a constructive criticism" guy, and never actually bashed Democrats.

[bigtree]

69. .

[Polybius]

78. Are you happy that he's gone?

[bigtree]

83. oh, you.

... you do try hard.

[Polybius]

93. I'll take that as a yes

[bigtree]

120. this must be a trying time for you

...I feel your pain.

[Polybius]

124. I know who else you want gone

[bigtree]

132. do tell

...go on, anonymous person.

Dish.

[Polybius]

135. The vast majority of us here are anonymous

[bigtree]

145. I can confidently call quite a lot of posters as internet friends.

...know many of the actual personas behind the screen names.

Others, not so much.

[obamanut2012]

84. I am

[Think. Again.]

70. I never saw his posts as motivating, the opposite really.

[Polybius]

76. We've disagreed, the same way as you've disagreed with him

But I never saw it as anything personal. We all just have different ways.

[Think. Again.]

86. Why would you take it personally? This is a political support online discussion site.

[Polybius]

96. We don't take it personally

But many others do.

[bigtree]

123. "We"

[Polybius]

130. I was responding to Think. Again.

That poster and I don't take it personally.

[bigtree]

141. you okay?

...everything going alright personally?

You seem upset on this thread.

[Polybius]

143. The vast majority of people are upset in this thread

You should be too.

[bigtree]

146. about what?

...what do you think I should be upset about today?

I'm confident you'll tell me.

[Polybius]

148. A major poster is gone

I enjoy diversity.

[bigtree]

156. I thought it was self-inflicted

...looks like they didn't take enough responsibility for their posts.

Don't know them well-enough to be concerned about them personally, even though I also run in highly influential D.C area circles (albeit in my own yard).

I'm sure they're fine. Taking a break that they'll likely realize they should have taken long ago.

You going to be alright?

[Polybius]

166. Of course I'll be alright, he wasn't a real-life personal friend or family member

But I do agree that after a certain number, he should have taken a break. Posted about cars or something.

[bigtree]

172. cool, cool

...see you in the threads.

[Polybius]

43. Here's his Twitter/X:

https://x.com/ChrisBastianBkl

[brush]

48. That's a surprise. He added a lot of content here, was often a contrarian with odd points of view at times.

Once dped, can one come back?

[barbaraann]

49. Hmmm... He nitpicked several of my posts.

His attitude toward me seemed excessively negative, for some reason. I do have some unusual ideas, but I'm not an idiot.

[Aepps22]

51. Happens

His donor post did him in and I'm not surprised. It is what it is.

[whathehell]

126. What was the doner post?

[ZonkerHarris]

55. They never seemed to support Joe Biden. For the last 4 years.

[emulatorloo]

173. They were very much against replacing Biden on the ballot though

[pinkstarburst]

57. That's a shame

I thought he brought good viewpoints to the conversation.

[TwilightZone]

58. Not that surprised - some posters seemed to follow him around.

As others noted, he was a bit of a contrarian, and that tended to rub some the wrong way. Some seemed to take it personally. I'll leave it at that.

[Ocelot II]

61. That's kind of a shame.

He had some interesting insights - unfortunately they were sometimes presented in a way that got people's backs up. But just being pompous and condescending shouldn't be grounds for expulsion; I never saw any posts that I thought actually violated the TOS.

[Music Man]

64. I hope he's back soon.

The inability of many in this forum to consider information that suggests Biden is not winning in a landslide has been maddening.

Brooklynite made it clear he supported Biden staying on the ticket, but he rightfully introduced some realism about where we're really standing. I appreciate having adults in the room.

[edisdead]

73. That's pretty hyperbolic in itself.

I don’t think you will find many that cannot conceive that Bisen won’t win in a landslide.

[Bleacher Creature]

94. I feel the same way.

I don't want someone on this site who's not willing to proudly vote for Biden this fall, but to suggest that everything is fine and that any issues are the creation of the media, "elites," etc. is foolish and will lead to the unthinkable next January.

[drray23]

65. Not surprising .

This "insider" delighted in posting negative stuff all the time, belittling others for not being in the know, using condescending tones like we are idiots, bragging about his connections and status as a fundraiser, all this under the guise of informing us on how it's supposed to all work.
I would not be surprised if he is amongst those who were raising money to oust President Biden.

[Polybius]

90. He supports Biden staying in

He just has inside knowledge about many who don't, so his posts came across as negative a lot.

[Alliepoo]

67. You've got to be joking...

Seriously? I enjoy hearing what he has to say. He has access to political people and events that most of us don’t. He states hard truths sometimes and seems to rub some folks the wrong way sometimes but so do others here on DU sometimes. I don’t understand why he was kicked off.

[Renew Deal]

74. Hopefully he can get below 5 hides and get back on.

I was wondering where he was. He can be frustrating, but he is also a true Democrat and belongs on this site.

[obamanut2012]

91. He was FFRed.

[Renew Deal]

95. I know

But admins can end their review, especially after his hides come down. He's no troll.

[Prairie Gates]

158. The way I understand the 5 hides rule, FFR isn't only for trolls

It's just as much for having people reflect on their behavior in a community. You don't have to be a bad actor (troll) to treat people abysmally. Five hides generally signals that you are not being a good member of a community, that you are treating your fellow community members poorly. I thought MIRT was mainly for trolls.

[bluestarone]

102. TRUE! out of everything that i believe about him is,

He's a TRUE DEMOCRAT! There was NEVER a doubt in my mind that he was probably a better Democrat than anybody here. He had his ways, BUT it was what he believed and what he always thought was best for Joe and Kamala. (and our country) Looking forward for his return.

[dweller]

81. welp

I guess we are finally off his lawn …




✌🏻

[LakeArenal]

167. Haha!!! Good one.

[moniss]

82. I don't keep tabs but

I have no problem with people having a contrary view or seeing different tangents etc. but it seemed when I would see a response it could sometimes get over into a personal and accusatory realm.

[madibella]

85. Is this the person who is part of a DNC fundraising group?

I always thought they were respectful.

[Polybius]

98. Yes

That's him.

[Think. Again.]

104. They also claimed they were a major internal polling official.

[obamanut2012]

97. I guess I'm in the minority

Because I found him elitist, condescending, "oooh i have insider knowledge " that was almost always wrong, and delighted in posting negative spin.

Remember his Red Wave in 2020 and 2022? His "insiders" told him that

Seems I am in the minority, but oh well.

[Polybius]

100. I don't remember it at all in 2020

I know he predicted a Biden win.

[obamanut2012]

114. Only when it became obvious

And only between doomposting during those bad two weeks.

I am not arguing about him. My opinion is as valid as anyone else, and I know many folks on here who privately disliked him.

[demmiblue]

111. Yeah, his prognostications were quite often wrong...

I always wondered why so many thought of him as some sort of political guru.

Wealth =/= smarts.

[obamanut2012]

119. Yup

And again, yes, we have his real name, but howdo we know he was an insider?

A member of this DU's husband is an Ex Congressman and is a personal, close friend of Biden's. And Hillary. And Amy K. And others. They are an actual insider. They do not reflect what Brooklynite says, ever

[ms liberty]

157. No, I agree with you. Anyone from NC should remember

When he told us he'd just met our next Senator, Cheri Beasley, and that she was going to run a grassroots campaign and was sure to win.

Problem is, we didn't even know she was running when he condescended to tell us, and Jeff Jackson was already running for that seat. He was already running a grassroots campaign, and was finishing up a tour of having a town hall in every one of NC's 100 counties; it had taken a while because he was also in the state legislature at the time. And then he was pushed to drop out and endorse Cheri Beasley, a former State Supreme Court Judge.
I was insulted, because Jeff Jackson had already stepped away from a Senate run after being asked to by the Party, so that Cal Cunningham could run.

So now NC has 2 GOP Senators, because Cal Cunningham lost and then Cheri Beasley lost. Jeff Jackson is running for AG in this election,, because the congressional seat he won in that election was gerrymandered out of existence.

And now, a group of donors are trying to push out a sittting President and the overwhelming winner of our primaries because they think they know better than the voters.

[ibegurpard]

161. I'm in the minority with you

[Eliot Rosewater]

99. I didn't always care for his approach but I often read

What he had to say because I knew he had insider knowledge, he must’ve been saying that the insiders were saying that Joe had to step down, is that what he was saying that rubbed people the wrong way?

He might be right, I hope not but he might be right.

I am probably the last person he expects to see on here saying something like this, but as much as he annoyed the shit out of me at times I will admit I realized he had valuable information.

[obamanut2012]

121. How do you know he had insider info?

[ms liberty]

103. I saw it happen and I was fine with it.

I was attempting to post a reply to him. It wouldn't post, and I looked to see why.

[Polybius]

109. Who's the other?

[Polybius]

118. Phew!

I know it's not me now!

[obamanut2012]

128. How do you know he has insider info

Because he told you.

[Polybius]

137. He does

I have personally seen it. The dude is invited to $100,000 dinners for free.

[obamanut2012]

129. How do you know he has insider info

Because he told you.

[RockRaven]

116. Can't say I'm surprised given the content of his posts and the rather

overuse, IMO, of the "Support Democrats" alert (based on the jury duties I am given anyway, obviously I only have anecdotal experience not global data).

When you get close to the edge, maybe take a step back. After your 3rd hide in a given window, maybe reevaluate what/how you are posting and adjust.

[LeftInTX]

117. I appreciated his insider info.

He was kinda cynical, so maybe that's why he got the hides.
Some people didn't seem to trust him because he seemed to know a lot of movers and shakers.
I think like the rest of us, he was freaking out, but he was doing it earlier.
He didn't name names on the fundraising committee and some didn't trust his info.
I was hoping he would take our responses back to some of the PTB that he knew.

He was kinda cynical, so maybe that rubbed people the wrong way.

[peggysue2]

133. He Was???

I haven't seen any of his posts recently but assumed he was keeping his head down during the storm.

I frequently disagree with Brooklynite's point of view but contrarian perspectives should be acceptable, as long as they're not nasty, flaming exercises and/or disrespecting the Democratic Party and our candidates/nominees.

We are (for better or worse) the party of yowling cats.

[TheKentuckian]

134. Because too many people alert and vote to hide based

on nothing but disagreement.

I seldom ever agreed with the poster under discussion and often found them pompous and over the top with the bragging about being connected and well heeled but none of that should even tempt the finger to push the alert button.

Folks aren't honestly protecting community standards but rather enforcing their thought bubble so their beautiful dreams are left undisturbed in too many cases.

This is just marching toward Lord of the Flies/Mean Girls stuff with slightly more flowery excuses for ganging up on "others" and "others" keep growing rather than anything about a community or broadly electing Democrats.

[WarGamer]

162. Post.Of.The.Day.

[NBachers]

140. I Will Survive

[Emile]

142. Constantly posting articles against President Biden

to step aside and destroying any chance of defeating the sick fuck?

[Polybius]

175. He didn't post that, he just posted news of people who wanted Biden to step aside

Personally, I and him both want Biden to stay in.

[Tadpole Raisin]

152. I would love to know which posts were hidden so I could see

how offensive they really were.

Yes he could be ‘blunt’ shall we say but I still thought he made interesting points and especially the last few weeks there were lots of things I didn’t want to hear but I have never shied away from information that challenged my world view.

How do you enforce the rule of not speaking ill of the Democratic Party when some big names have called for Biden to step down. Are they now against the party and should be stricken from positive and supportive posts?

I saw posts that vilified democratic politicians and well known democratic supporters who prior to that were darlings. It was shocking. It felt like the democratic version of shut up and dribble.

I’ve been really stressed about the whole thing and the vitriol only added to it. Very sad!

[republianmushroom]

153. Some thin skin, maybe, by some ?

[totodeinhere]

154. I think the admins are making a mistake when they enforce a type of group think.

We should be allowed to have a difference of opinion in this group even if it comes to President Biden himself..

[ibegurpard]

155. Constantly antagonizing people

Usually knows just how far to push it without crossing the line but people are in such an uproar that juries are knee-jerking.
I don't disbelieve his bona-fides but his constant name-dropping is really tiresome and his contempt for most of the people here makes me question why he's ever here. It's been a pattern for years. It's like he gets enjoyment from antagonizing people. There's a name for that...

[Autumn]

174. He posted an email notifying him a Democratic fund raiser was canceled.

That was kind of strange.

[EarlG]

177. For the same reason that anyone else who gets 5 hidden posts in 90 days gets kicked off

Locking.