This message was self-deleted by its author

[grasswire]

This message was self-deleted by its author (grasswire) on Sat May 31, 2014, 11:13 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[seabeyond]

1. Ya. Who is doing it? Nt

[polly7]

9. Yes, it's creepy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5021388

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5021418

[Cooley Hurd]

13. Well, there ya go.

[Violet_Crumble]

43. Then there's this as well...

I remembered this because I was one of the people who rec'd the OP.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=37664

I assumed it was some clumsy attempt at public shaming, but as I agreed with the OP, it just came across as a bit weird to me. I've seen similar things when someone's posted an OP that's bigoted or RW, but in this case the OP was none of those things...

[seabeyond]

44. better be careful actually remembering something and putting a link or you too might be.... one

[Violet_Crumble]

67. Might be one of what?

This OP's about keeping lists of who recs certain OPs. I gave an example of one list that I remembered because I was one of the people on that list. I'm not really seeing what the problem is here...

[seabeyond]

69. it was a copy and paste at the time. talking about who rec. it was not a dossier to be kept

and continually added to keep current ect... so no. it is not what the Op was talking about... dossier. did that look like a dossier to you? have you seen that poster keep a running tab on anyone?

no

but you did get your call out in

[Electric Monk]

82. I had a similar post hidden once. It was simply a copy-paste of who had recced the thread I was in.

Maybe you should consider yourself lucky that your post wasn't hidden as well. Juries can be fickle.

[seabeyond]

92. ya roll the dice. but. violets post was not about me, calling someone else out. polly was calling

me out. i guess no one is allowed to talk about recommends. and some may suggest we are not even allowed to look. now.... how silly is that.

[merrily]

155. The first rule of Rec Club is never talk about Rec Club.

I guess?

[pintobean]

159. Remember that time in Meta...

I was thinking of you while reading some of this. Ya gotta admit, that was funny.

[Electric Monk]

186. How ultra-Meta are we to now be talking about a forum that was for talking about other forums

and the ways people were talking in the other forums?

I think we've gone meta squared, or maybe even meta cubed here now that I'm talking about your talking about people who were talking about how people were talking. Good job!

[Violet_Crumble]

89. I'd say most lists are copies and pastes...

I doubt anyone sits there and manually types out everyone's names. And that one was being updated. That's why there were edits on the post. And considering that came only a few days after the one someone else has mentioned that was listing names of people 'for posterity' who rec'd another OP in GD, I think it is an example of what the OP in this thread's talking about.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5031462

How was my post a call out? I'd be interested in knowing...

[seabeyond]

96. so, that does look like a dossier and you do know it has been continually updated?

[Violet_Crumble]

97. See that thing with a question mark after it in the post you just replied to?

It's known as a question. Do you want to answer it?

[seabeyond]

99. not really violet. i already posted like two times more than i cared.

[Violet_Crumble]

103. Then don't go accusing me of call outs if you won't say why it's a call out...

Because I didn't call anyone out...

[seabeyond]

107. what are you talking about? you went months to get tuesdays post up there. ya. call out. now done

[maddezmom]

110. The entire post in the link is a callout of DU'ers, not sure wtf you're not getting about this

[Violet_Crumble]

115. I'm sorry, but that wasn't a call-out

At the risk of sounding like I'm repeating myself, because I am, I read this thread and remembered the one time I've ever been included in a list of people who rec'd an OP, I'm assuming for the purpose of shaming them. Even for someone like me who isn't gifted at going and finding something I remember, this one took all of less than a minute to find.

[BainsBane]

245. If you don't want to let people know you have reccomended a thread

Perhaps you shouldn't recommend it?

[Violet_Crumble]

248. Who said I didn't want people to know? I'm aware of how the rec system works n/t

[BainsBane]

250. Then why complain that someone had the audacity to comment about recs on a thread?

These threads are yet another opportunity to jump on posters people don't like, when everyone comments about recs at some point. The whole thing is both predicable and supremely boring.

The irony is that thread you rec'd and link to was chastising HOF for having Meta threads, while you are here enthusiastically participating in a Meta thread, calling out another member. Somehow HOF is supposed to be the only place Meta threads aren't allowed. Is there no point at which people ask themselves: "Am I doing what I accuse others of? Why is it okay for me but awful when someone else does it?"

[Violet_Crumble]

253. Who said I was complaining?

I wasn't. I gave it as an example of what I thought the person who started the OP was talking about. While I think the attempt to shame those who rec an OP tactic is a lame and kind of weird one, that's my opinion, not a complaint.

On the subject of Meta OPs. Having been involved in the writing of the one for HoF, I'm kind of familiar with it and recall this bit:

2) No individual personal call outs of any DUer

I'm also a GD host at the moment, and there's no restriction on Meta, just on whining about DU, and also disruptive Meta, which would involve OPs calling out individual DUers, whining about jury results etc...

[seabeyond]

28. what? we are not allowed to LOOK at recommends in threads we are in and someone says...

look at rec?

i am the culprit? lol

fug. i cant remember a conversation from last week, let alone this coordination being suggested in Op.

but, wtf, right polly



here you are. once again.

[JTFrog]

37. Hey, don't look now,

but it looks like you're on someone's list.

[seabeyond]

39. bH HhHhH. i dunno. an Op of 170 replies. moving along at least 24 hours. ONE post.

i made one post. in minutes, bam.... i get hit by a poster that has not had any conversation in that thread, but likes to go after my post. i wonder some times.'

again, so much shit going on, who the fug knows right? but i wonder sometimes. like... is this Op about that? surely not. would certainly be an extreme interpretation.

[polly7]

83. Uh .... well yeah ......

it was a reply to someone who was joking that my thread was on the greatest page .............. by recs. You just had to look and see who rec'd, then tried to shame someone for it. Then your insulting little gif to me ... why would't I be here? I hadn't posted to you and was trying to understand why someone rec'ing a thread was so terrible. You can explain here, because i still don't get it. I rec a lot of pages to remember them by to get back to, others I rec because they're excellent threads. I've never seen anyone get angry before because of a rec.

[seabeyond]

98. i just HAD to look at the 5 rec the poster was applauding. i just HAD to take note one of the names

was the same as the only poster that voted.... no means yes.

you are right polly.

you got me.

[polly7]

100. That's all you did?

No insulting PB for it, no stupid little gif for me? I think those posts are still here .... maybe you just need to have a look.

[seabeyond]

105. omg... lmao.. ah ha. oh polly. GRASSWIRE would you lilke to clarify if your Op is

about me. and stop the nonsense.

[polly7]

108. I have no idea what you're talking about.

What OP is about you?

[gollygee]

79. Is that what this is about?

Because that says nothing about keeping lists, just that someone noticed who rec'd one thread, and I've seen that lots from lots of people.

This is a stupid irrelevant and intentionally misleading call-out thread.

[polly7]

87. No, it's just one example of someone taking recommends waaaay too seriously. nt.

[gollygee]

91. She just said she noticed it

not that she took it all that seriously.

[polly7]

95. Seriously enough to post an insulting little gif to me for asking what the

problem was. But never mind that ......

[gollygee]

101. If you think the gif was insulting

then that's a more valid thing to complain about then an imaginary "list", or even that she looked at who rec'd something. There is no valid complaint there. If looking at the rec list were a problem, it wouldn't be visible. Talk to Skinner if you want that shut down or think it's misusing DU somehow to look at who rec's what.

[polly7]

106. Insulting people for recommending something is lame, but not report worthy. nt.

[gollygee]

113. Freaking out over people looking at who recs what

and creating a rumor that people are making lists about that is not a good thing to start a thread over. I hope this gets locked because it's meta garbage.

[polly7]

114. I don't see anyone here freaking out.

Just giving examples.

[seabeyond]

102. i was kinda fuckin laughin' at you all. how serious is that. hence the lmfao.

[polly7]

112. Oooooooh ...........

Thanks for the explanation. Glad you didn't take any of it seriously.

[seabeyond]

117. i would have thought it obvious.

[polly7]

120. lmao. Isn't that just precious.

(And no, you weren't laughing at anyone, you were insulting and upset at PB, then me. I'm not stupid.)

[seabeyond]

121. yes. i think it is beyond precious. it is an absolute fav. and yes. i was too laughing. bah hah

[seabeyond]

123. look polly, an OP many interpreted defending mra, a man is the only one that vote for no means yes

in a poll.

pb says... you made greatest page and applauds. i am shocked i tell you... and see five friggin recommends. i look. see the names. laugh some more. recognize the no means yes guy. and laugh harder

it was fuggin funny. you have to admit.

a hoot

[polly7]

234. look seabeyond,

I see you're still making a big deal of 5 recommends, and I have no idea why that's funny or why the number of recommends or 'the names' matters enough even to get a mention. Actually, i have no idea what you're talking about.

[BainsBane]

243. Where does it say she is keeping lists?

It does not. She comments on recs. People do that everyday. I have to wonder why it is you feel compelled to monitor everything that one member does. Shall I do a search to see how often you use the word rec?

[SixString]

2. Yes it is. N/T.

[cyberswede]

3. I only look at who recs mine.

[JVS]

4. Yes. Yes it is.

I'd rec your post but I don't want any trouble.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

84. Your name is going in my book anyway.

Get your book out!

Write his name down!

Now draw a line through it!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

5. Sounds like some sort of obsessive behaviour.

And fairly trollish, actually.

[octoberlib]

6. Yes.

[AverageJoe90]

7. I think it IS in some cases, TBH. nt

[geek tragedy]

8. you have information indicating that this sort of thing is happening? do tell nt

[rhett o rick]

25. You mean you dont know about the secret meeting place? nm

[Warren DeMontague]

40. Here is an example of what I think the OP means.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=36833

[seabeyond]

42. February???

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Is there a shelf life?

It's an example of the behavior. Textbook, because it's listing the recs "for posterity".

(Perhaps if one didn't want it to come up again in the future, leaving the word "posterity" out of the post would be a good start.)



Like I said, I think people maybe need new hobbies, if they've got nothing better to do than make lists of who recs what.

[seabeyond]

47. how creepy is it to take some vague Op comment and pull up other duers to diss, for some agenda?

[Warren DeMontague]

51. The OP is about people on DU making lists of who recs certain threads.

It would be physically impossible for my response there to be more directly on topic.

[seabeyond]

54. so. we gonna do a search of all people that make a comment about rec and the out them?

[Warren DeMontague]

60. Are we?

...you can!

[seabeyond]

62. no desire... you are the one that felt the need. dont be looking at me.

[Warren DeMontague]

71. Not me! I gotta get caught up on the Netflix.

For some reason, I never get tired of saying "Benedict Cumberbatch"

[Texasgal]

168. Talk about keeping "lists"

you pulled that shit out of FEBRUARY?

LOL! You just made this thread! Thank you!

[Warren DeMontague]

196. Keep trying.

I'm sure someone is furiously scribbling down all the names of the recs of this thread, as we speak.

Which reminds me.

[seabeyond]

205. right. wow. you are serious. who would have thought. cause honestly, no way i

thought you serious

[Warren DeMontague]

210. Another post I ...kinda don't understand.

No, I'm not serious in that it's not a subject I take all that seriously, however, I do think it's a silly behavior and the linked post is a textbook example of it.

[Riftaxe]

75. He said some, not denizens of DU

Surely by now you know the difference!

[Kali]

157. and how does your linking to an old post from February

compare with my observation of the few who recc'd one stupid flamey post (in February)(that we seem to STILL be talking about)?

[seabeyond]

160. omg. not THAT thread. lol. i simply looked at the name and date. i did not see what it was. too

funny

[Warren DeMontague]

223. Sure, the SI thread was February. The meltdowns and tantrums over that one picture, though

lasted a good 3 weeks or more afterwards.

I think any calculations of dates ought to take that into account, no?

[seabeyond]

225. your interpretation is utter bullshit, but i get it works for you. done with you too.

[Warren DeMontague]

195. Because the OP is about making lists of people who rec threads

which you executed with perfect form in that post.

Plus you said "for posterity"....



so, here's the posterior you requested.

[merrily]

162. I assumed he meant something more than just posting the recs for a thread that you are on at that

moment. That is not building a dossier. Sounded as though he meant someone keeping a running record of some kind. And, yes, that would be creepy. And I have no doubt some do it. I saw a post only yesterday or the day before in which someone had compiled all the posts of a certain poster. I don't know whether to laugh at or cry for someone that obsessive and wrapped up in a fucking message board. The term "Get a Life" leapt to mind.

[scarletwoman]

165. I agree, I think the OP was talking about people "keeping a running record".

And, like you, I've witnessed those sorts of compilations of another person's posts being posted by certain people here

"Creepy" is exactly what it is - creepy obsessive behavior.

[merrily]

169. Imagine if that kind of energy were devoted to improving someone else's life.

Or even one's own. Because attaching that kind of importance and effort to shaming fellow DUers strongly implies a life (and a heart) that could use improvement.

[scarletwoman]

173. Very true.

I don't really get it - attaching SO much importance to a discussion forum. But for some people here, this is a war zone - complete with enemies who must be defeated by any means - and they are consumed by the battle.

I generally avoid engaging with them - it's too crazy-making. If you tangle with one of them in a thread, pretty soon you'll have the whole cohort tag-teaming on you, and it's relentless.

[merrily]

208. Funny you should say that, because I recently decided that it is a war zone.

However, I think even going toe to toe, or cudgel v. cudgel, in the moment is qualitatively and quantitatively different from, to use the OPs phrase, spending all that time compiling and organizing dossiers and keeping them at the ready. "Cause if that's being done, it probably involves more than just one dossier on just one poster.

[malokvale77]

202. This exactly

This is in reply to scarletwoman also.

How sad is it when somebody spends all their time looking for some offence on DU, rather than extending a hand to a fellow being.

[Cooley Hurd]

10. Yes...

It means they take an internet message board wayyy to seriously.

[Skittles]

11. I'd say looking at who thinks "no sometimes means yes" is very illuminating

nice to know who the sick fucks are

[redqueen]

118. Yep, this. Priorities. nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

12. And likely those that support Snowden and accuse others of supporting the NSA!

The irony escapes them!!!

[Mojorabbit]

23. The opposite actually. I find it fascinating. nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

74. And what pray tell would be more fascinating or even amusing than their own hypocrisy?

[bobduca]

170. Not amusing, but did you see this creepy call for Snowden to be shot?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5029718

Charming company...

[malokvale77]

192. I missed that post

Creepy indeed.

If that had been an OP, I bet I could win a wager on who cheered it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

239. You mean like Snowden himself said should be "shot in the balls" if they do what HE did?

When the person in the White House was a White guy!

[malokvale77]

204. Sometimes...

you can only roll your eyes.

[840high]

64. Inacurate.

[VanillaRhapsody]

72. In what way?

[Blue Owl]

14. You better check yo self before you rec yo self...

n/t

[malokvale77]

206. There is at least...

one here famous for that. LOL

[Shandris]

15. Yah, I think its really creepy actually.

Along with people who say things like how 'telling' something is (it usually isn't), or 'noted' (as if that were supposed to intimidate me), or who can present links on a moment's notice for the oddest things said in the past (usually out of context).

The only names I remember are those who are insulting towards me repetitively, and even then I usually forget why in a day or so, or those whom I really respect the opinion of (and that's a rather long list actually, although sometimes I don't remember it until I see their name).

Keeping track of hidden posts, though? That's beyond creepy, thats stalker-y.

[Autumn]

17. What really creeps me out is how one can pull out links posted by someone now

and have comparisons on another poster from years back. It's like some one has a data base they pull it up so fast.

[merrily]

164. Sad. Attaching that much importance to a message board instead of real life. And

be willing to spend that kind of time on building a case against some poster or bunch of posters. Just sad.

[pipi_k]

130. Yeah, the old

"very telling" crap.

Or sarcastic "that's interesting".


People keeping track of hidden posts, and the ultimate in creepy, being able to remember, and link to, posts from months ago.

Although second to that is when people can remember poll answers and use them as ammunition.


Like polls and recs give them the ability to "know" someone. Even if they take into account some written answers, that's not the entirety of a person, which can change from day to day, and I often find that people who keep track like that mostly lack the ability to see the fine points of a lot of issues.

To them, it's all either black or white, with nothing in between.


And yes, a lot of times, those links are totally taken out of context.

Like you, the only ones I remember are the ones who are persistently rude to me. For everyone else, every day is a new one.

[barbtries]

16. are you saying that people do that?

are they paid posters or something?

[Katashi_itto]

52. I experienced that. From people of a particular group in fact. They called up stuff incredibly

fast.

[barbtries]

70. wow.

yeah, i think it's creepy. and far too time consuming if you have to work as i do - could it be their work? i just wonder.

[A Simple Game]

104. Even worse, I think it's their life. Some take these internets wayyy too seriously. n/t

[Buns_of_Fire]

18. I imagine some do, but it doesn't bother me.

Often, I'll rec a post I agree with. Sometimes, I'll rec posts that I don't necessarily agree with, but the post spawned a good discussion. Sometimes, I'll rec posts that I've responded to. Sometimes, I don't.

The only thing anyone could glean from such a list is that I'm consistently inconsistent.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. Um, uh, er,the software keeps a list of who recs each op.

But, like you knew that, right?

[pscot]

119. do all members have access

to that information?

[Blanks]

135. If you click on the 'number' above the DUrec icon...

It shows a list if those who rec'd the thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=thread&address=10025031306&info=1#recs

Not that I'm keeping track, because some people think that's creepy.

[pscot]

141. I knew that

I was thinking more in terms of a searchable data base of all thread recs. NSA is fucking wit my mind, I guess.

[Blanks]

145. Oh...

I figure if someone was keeping track they'd just copy and paste it to their own database.

I think you can also see what threads a person has rec'd in their profile. Not that I'm doing that.

[scarletwoman]

139. Of course we do. Just click on the square with the number in it above the "rec" button.

You'll get a page that lists all the names of those who recommended that OP.

You can also go to anyone's profile page, click on their "Recommendations" tab, and see a list of every thread they've recommended in the past 90 days.

[pscot]

147. I did not know that

So it is entirely possible for some person or persons with an agenda to check out all one's recs and in effect target one for holding "inappropriate" views. I would never have given this a thought, except that we seem to be having a collective nervous breakdown around here at present.

[scarletwoman]

152. Yup. Someone tried to use one of my "recommends" against me back in the old Meta days.

The fact was, I had purposely rec'd that particular post just to piss off the self-righteous, self-appointed Party purity police people like him.

I still do that, every chance I get.

[pintobean]

154. Ditto

That word will set some of them off.

[pscot]

171. Purity Police

It does seem vaguely Teutonic. Reinheitspolizei?

[pintobean]

153. And, when you get to that list

you can click on a name, and it will take you to that person's list of recs on their profile page.

I've never done more than a curious glance at anyone's recs. You never know why anyone recs anything. I sometimes rec just to screw with the list keepers.

[malokvale77]

193. Seems to be the case (nt)

[Warren Stupidity]

179. Yes they do. This is all much ado about nothing.

[pscot]

184. Maybe

But a group with an agenda could pile on an individual. I've seen it done.

[malokvale77]

197. ^^^this^^^

Creepy and lame.

[Shankapotomus]

20. I can't keep track of who's who

or who said what when. So if I rec someone's thread who was a misogynist or anti-gun control in a thread I missed I like to hope I'll be forgiven, as I would grant the same to anyone else.

[Warren DeMontague]

21. Rec Policing is another in a long line of creeptastic behaviors from otherwise hobby-deprived people

who take this place WAY too seriously.

[malokvale77]

211. Yes

On a side note; my father was in Timbuktu during WWII. Officially it did not exist.

[Warren DeMontague]

213. How strange for him!

I need to swap out the sig anyway. Technically in some versions of the lyric it is spelled "Timbuctoo"

[malokvale77]

227. Spelling aside

His military records show a blank timeline for the period he was there.

[Shivering Jemmy]

22. It's a waste of time

[Louisiana1976]

24. It seems weird to me, too. Unless they're keeping track of who recs their own posts.

[valerief]

26. Are you calling the NSA creepy?

[pscot]

175. Deeply, disturbingly creepy

[kairos12]

27. I only keep track if its Rec It Ralph.

[savalez]

29. Wait a minute! DU keeps a list just like that!

Creepy DU!

[elleng]

30. Depends on the intention, I guess,

whether it's 'creepy.' Excessive, at the least, IMO!

[gollygee]

31. Writing down a list would be creepy

But on the other hand you don't have to have a great memory to just notice trends. That doesn't involve list keeping.

[grasswire]

41. there's a rumor that this "dossier" info is kept off DU

Perhaps on facebook or some other site.

[seabeyond]

46. glad to hear about some dossier on some Fb site cause you have a whole lot of people calling out

others here in your thread cause of agendas.

lovely.

[Squinch]

48. Wait... WHAT??

If true, that's really crazy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. see 57

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. My friends at Conservative Cave have extensive dossiers

on regulars on this site.

Hell, those cheapskates even have a yearly award ceremony, but I have yet to get an actual physical award and the usual dinner.

They are fixated... and now Frank (The owner of CC) posts at Discusionists. At least he is not talking in his usual lingo, such as primitives.

[grasswire]

63. yes, that's true

But this is Democrats keeping dossiers on Democrats, ostensibly.

Congratulations on your unflappable ability to mesmerize them.

[Squinch]

66. Ewwwwwwwwww!

I keep running into posters here who suggest that choosing not to post on Discussionist is evidence of some kind of elitism.

Hearing this, I'm fine with that. That's a shark jump right there.

[gollygee]

68. Sounds like paranoia

Rumors aren't really reliable.

[malokvale77]

198. I agree on this

It doesn't take long to figure out who has a point vs who are just cheerleading.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

32. Rec'ing this for the fuck of it.

[A Simple Game]

116. Noted. n/t

[Spitfire of ATJ]

134. .......heh........

[malokvale77]

199. I rec'd for the same reason (nt)

[riderinthestorm]

33. Yes nt

[Brother Buzz]

34. I've come to realize a ton of people recommend threads as simple informal bookmarks...

hence they are totally worthless for judging the merits of a particular thread; I ignore that recommend thingy.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

77. I've been trying to use 'permalink' to do that.

But I have no idea where I go to find a list of things I've hit 'permalink' on.

[Brother Buzz]

88. LOL, that's exactly why the rec thingy gets abused

[scarletwoman]

246. Permalink doesn't save anything, all it does is open a post by itself instead of imbedded

within the whole thread.

One easy way to find a thread again is to post in it. Then all you have to do is click on the "My Posts" tab at the top of the page to find it.

Otherwise, use the "Bookmark" button at the bottom left of each OP. To get to your bookmarks click on "My Bookmarks" on the upper right of the page.

[msanthrope]

109. I got lectured on doing that! I had recc'd a thread instead of bookmarking it,

since I really like keeping my bookmark lkst short. I also was posting in the thread.

The OP was latter banned for homophobia.....so of course, I was labled a homophobe.

[Cha]

146. Of course you were.. and if you ever use "GG" you're a double one. The only time

I ever saw a list posted with Recs was by the snowden/GG crowd with my name on it. I don't even look at Recs unless it's my OP and then I do. I kinda have better things to do.

[PeaceNikki]

35. As creepy as starting a thread meant to pile on another member.

[dipsydoodle]

78. Indeed but then this one has considerably more recs. - currently 26.

Largely the difference between lame and not lame.

[seabeyond]

86. except no one quite knows what the Op is talking about or if it is even true. nt

[geek tragedy]

143. Oh I'm willing to bet it's not true. there is one FB group dedicated to banned DUers, but

people would have to out themselves by joining it with their real names, so not so frightening really.

[seabeyond]

150. hmmmm. lol. i have heard ____, but i have never seen. nope. no personal for me.

not even out of interest. sure would be nice for clarification though. what the OP is about.

[malokvale77]

229. I'm sorry to see...

You've fallen into the company of not me.

[seabeyond]

233. gigglin'. nt

[greatauntoftriplets]

201. Yes.

[JoeyT]

36. Depends on the context.

If a poster is insisting they've never seen something posted before when they recced something earlier that day saying exactly that, then that seems like fair game to bring up.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Well, sad to say it, but it is all but shocking to me

[RiffRandell]

49. It's a contest for some people.

Sad, but amusing at the same time.

[L0oniX]

50. Do we need a DU Snowden to bring home some truth?

[bvar22]

93. Now THAT would be interesting!

*

[JI7]

53. it doesn't take much to recognize certain types

it's how right wing trolls are exposed although there are many who still fall for their crap.

just look at that one racist who has been spewing racist and anti choice shit and got too many hides so can't post. but they still have not been banned.

[Californeeway]

55. people need to grow the fuck up and learn.....

..how to deal with the basic reality that there are people out there with different opinions than you, not because they are part of some evil plot, but because they legitimately disagree. Trying to track their statements, drag stuff out from 5 months ago to shame them. Yes, it's obsessive and it's creepy. If someones comments bother you that much, engage in debate or trash thread. Stalking someone for disagreeing with you, trying to intimidate them etc. so creepy.

[malokvale77]

218. Yes, grow the fuck up

Forbid I disagree with somebodies lame post.

Questions will not be tolerated, and certainly not answered.

[SoapBox]

56. Well it is the "Net"!

Freaks and weirdos can do all sorts of crazy shit, 'cause it's the "Net"!

...hiding in mom's moldy basement, gives them so much freedom.

[840high]

59. Creepy.

[jberryhill]

61. yes

[DonViejo]

65. If folks want to put me on some sort of list...

so be it. Regardless of what my position on a given issue might be, I'll recommend a post for reading by others if I believe the post is informative and worth a read, even if I disagree with the post.

[Riftaxe]

73. A bit creepy

But you have to admit it passes the time for some!

Now not being too young i could suggest other past times, I tried knitting and macrame a few years ago and am still at it, that is time consuming and you have something (sometimes a mess of knots) at the end to be proud of!

[wyldwolf]

76. OMG, that's hysterical

Why don't they put that kind of effort in the real world defeating Republicans? I'm sure manning a voter reg table takes about the same amount of effort.

[99Forever]

80. Yep, stalker creepy. n/t

[bvar22]

81. That appeals to the conservative, authoritarian mindset,

...as has been shown explicitly by their posts at DU supporting the Surveillance/Security State
and absolute, unquestioning allegiance to the Leader.

[malaise]

85. Creepy is an understatement

Damn!!

[Curmudgeoness]

90. If I had known that some people are keeping track,

I would rec a lot more posts. I don't think about it every time I read a post I agree with, but maybe I should. At least people would know for sure where I stand. Instead, I read more than I post or rec.

[scarletwoman]

124. I do exactly that - rec lots of posts that I agree with, so if anyone wants to keep track, they'll

have a clear picture of where I stand.

[malokvale77]

221. " Instead, I read more than I post or rec."

Sometimes what I read, just makes me shake my head.

[Nevernose]

94. Yes, and it's been that way since the beginning

I'm well aware of it, but didn't really start giving a shit until recently. It used to be that people kept track of who they thought were trolls. I suppose that's still going on, but there seems to be lots more groups trying to monitor people/groups they simply disagree with, then using the alert/jury system to "get them in trouble."

Of course, that's just my impression.

[scarletwoman]

111. I hope everyone realizes that you can click on any DUer's profile & see a list of every thread

they've rec'd for the past 90 days? Just open their Profile page and click on the button marked "Recommendations".

I'm not sure why anyone would need to keep a list when every DUer's rec history is just a couple clicks away. And while you're looking at someone's "Recommendations" list on their profile page, you can also click on any of the thread titles on that list, go to that thread, and then look at who else recommended it.

I'm sure it's no surprise to anyone that there will be certains patterns apparent, showing which DUers tend to rec which types of threads. And it doesn't take keeping a dossier to see that. All it takes is remembering the usernames.

I, myself, decided a long time ago to make it real easy for anyone who wants to discern what kinds of threads I give recs to - for example, I make sure to rec the kinds of threads that I know a certain cohort here loves to attack, whether I participate in the thread or not.

I've built my recommend list with pride, and if someone wanted to use it against me, it would only show them up for the kind of person they are.

[bravenak]

122. Well du does keep a 'list' of everyone who rec'd each op.

I know, it's weird, right? It keeps it like forever, a dossier, if you will, of each and every op.... And those who recommend it.

And some people are pleased not to hear from members they don't like. So they 'notice' when they get enough hides to take a break. You can call it an enemies list, i call it a list of annoying people.

There are people who follow other duers around and complain about scandals from years ago. Same people, day after day.
Theres one person who follows Seabeyond around complaining about 'something' that she did years ago, asking for like an apology or something for something she did to someone else. I don't even want to know what she did now, i'm scared that it must have been a 'crime of great magnitude'.
Or it was a bit of chisme. Please don't ever let me find out. I will expire from boredom.
I also find it nuts, i agree with you.

[sabrina 1]

125. Yes, it is VERY CREEPY. Either such people don't have much to do in life, or there is an agenda.

Either way it is extremely creepy to find people tracking your comments back several years. The effort that goes into that could be used to do something POSITIVE. But there are those who live to divide for some reason.

[pintobean]

126. Sometimes I rec just to make the lists.

Or, just vote 'pass' the obvious 'trap' polls.

Some of the purity police use to post rec/poll lists in meta. Once in a while, someone would just post their shit list in an attempt to start witch hunts.

[arely staircase]

127. no

all ino is saved forever.i hsve posted things I am now nembarrasted by.

[malokvale77]

224. That is an embarrassment in itself (nt)

[carolinayellowdog]

128. I experienced very creepy "enemies list" behavior from the most prolific poster of all

Having been here since 2002 with an extremely clean and conflict-avoidant record, I would never in a million years dream of directly confronting ANY member of an organized gang, let alone its obvious leader. But once I did comment in a thread to someone else, who was wasting time reacting to her, "don't feed the trolls." Within 24 hours, on an entirely unrelated thread in which I was making some comment encouraging civility, she jumped in and confronted me with a link to the indirect comment I'd made on her relentless behavior.

That's when I learned they are keeping tabs on EVERYBODY even the most obscure and polite among us.

[scarletwoman]

158. Yup. Once you've been marked as an "enemy", they'll keep tabs on everything you post.

And watch and wait for some way to nail you.

I've been observing this behavior for some time.

[Blue_In_AK]

129. Yes, it's very creepy,

which is why I'm very circumspect about what I say here.

[Mr.Bill]

131. Yeah, it's creepy.

You need to put down the keyboard and go play outside for awhile and get some fresh air.

[UtahLib]

236. Absolutely!

I call it *garden therapy*.

[russspeakeasy]

132. OOPs...I think I just stumbled into the lounge.

[bahrbearian]

133. What's creepy is Fly Paper Polls

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

136. Recced, kicked and alerted!!!!

I'm covering all my bases.

[malokvale77]

230. LOL

[Texasgal]

137. Hell yeah it's creepy!

I'll never understand the "lists" that people keep around here.

[SidDithers]

138. I find the people that stalk and harass seabeyond to be much creepier...nt

Sid

[geek tragedy]

142. and there are a bunch of those. nt

[redqueen]

144. By FAR. nt

[SixString]

167. Or the ones who stalk and harass nadinbrzezinski. n/t

[malokvale77]

188. One in particular...

is really nasty.

[R B Garr]

189. Absolutely! One is moving into unhinged territory.

Seriously unhinged.

[treestar]

190. +1

[pintobean]

203. .

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/125532614#post40

[geek tragedy]

140. Is there any evidence of this, or is it just someone's overactive imagination?

All indicators are that it's the latter.

[ancianita]

148. What harm is it, really. I don't particularly care.

[carolinayellowdog]

166. the harm is the intimidation

Back in the good old days one might annoy an individual, but there was never the threat of being targeted and stalked as some kind of Enemy of the Party and the Homeland.

[one_voice]

149. Yes. It's creepy.

Some people use it as a 'pissing contest' as in "I've/we get more rec's than you' so we're better than you'. Some people use it as a shaming tool.

Some OP's are meant to be rec'd but meant to be used for discussion. In other words, they're not really 'saying' anything but suggesting something and asking for input. You don't necessarily rec those.

Some are light hearted and don't need rec's and weren't posted for that but for other members to enjoy.

[Octafish]

151. Undemocratic, when done in secret.

Some long ago got organized, shared what they know, combined posting strategies, and used positions of Authority, etc to apply the ziggy to good DUers.

It is nuts. Tyrannical, too.

[Egnever]

156. Yup

I would recommend therapy.

[The_Commonist]

161. Of course it's creepy.

But then creepy people do creepy things, so it's not at all surprising.

[Warpy]

163. I guess every moron out there has to have a hobby, especially the paranoid ones

Sometimes I have a "who the hell would recommend this piece of trash?" moment and look, but that's the end of it. I don't remember who was on any of the lists.

Yeah, it's nuts. It's both paranoid and spiteful.

I guess we're sane.

[Flying Squirrel]

172. I'll rec this just for fun...

I like to make lists, I'm a little OCD and it gives me something to do. When I first came to DU, I was accused of being "creepy" for the lists I made... DU moderators finally asked me to cut it out. But I do still compile data once in awhile, I just use a lot more discretion in the way I present the results. I certainly don't collect data for "gotcha" evidence against other DUers or for "enemies lists".

[Corruption Inc]

174. It's creepy to live with torture camps, for-profit everything and corruption

DU is mostly just a hangout for closet repukes.

[malokvale77]

183. It is looking that way (nt)

[reddread]

185. amazing what will be tolerated

and what wont be.

[B Calm]

176. ,Totally creepy! Sometimes I'll recommend a post even when I disagree

with the poster, if it's a point of view I never even thought of.

[quinnox]

177. I'd say a better word than creepy, is more like "pathetic", that comes to mind when I see this

And yes, as already mentioned, it tends to be the authoritarian-minded among duers who do this sort of thing. They seem to enjoy making "black lists" and records, interestingly.

I usually will announce I am recommending something when I see this type of behavior or posting, because it makes me chuckle.

[seabeyond]

178. so really, this has simply become a meta thread for you all.... "pathetic"

who is it that is "pathetic"

do tell

[quinnox]

191. The reason I like to announce I'm recommending a thread when I see this kind of thing, is

its the exact opposite of what the authoritarian minded would expect.

Their thinking goes like this - "I am going to expose or embarrass this duer for recommending this thread, that will teach them!".... "They won't dare recommend a thread like this in the future, ha!"

It is based on classic sheep-like thinking, as if the poster would find their rec being pointed out as embarrassing or something to be ashamed of.

So, in this scenario, I will make a point of publicly announcing I'm recommending, to show this type of authoritarian thinking and bully-ish behavior (which at the heart of it, is about trying to control another) is irrelevant to me.

If it pisses off those who engage in this type behavior, so much the better.

[seabeyond]

207. i do not care about all that. my comment was well turning this into a meta thread. that was all.

[Warren DeMontague]

212. Yeah, me too.

People who pride themselves on such detailed understanding of their fellow DU members ought to know by now, the best way to get me to do something is to tell me not to.

[yewberry]

180. I don't think that's a fair representation

of someone making note when someone recommends their own post.

Dossiers? Enemies lists? Where?

[malokvale77]

181. Yes it's creepy

and very Right Wing.

Seems like some here are wanting to purge.

[NuclearDem]

182. I doubt anyone keeps lists stored on their hard drive or anything.

All it takes is one member to put such a list together in a post and for someone else to Google search for it.

If someone's embarrassed by their rec, maybe they shouldn't have done so in the first place.

[treestar]

187. Yes I'm surprised at times

At how much people notice who is who.

I only know posters through experience and don't always pay attention to who it is so much as the content of the posts, and then later find out they remember me from some other long ago thread and have a grudge over it.

Some people are so negative.

[LittleBlue]

194. People keep lists of other DUers' recs?

Yeah, that's a bit creepy

[Whisp]

200. This OP is creepy. But yes I have seen them.

I've seen lists of people who support Obama, with sneers and contempt.

[grasswire]

222. could you find one of those for us?

That would be useful.

[malokvale77]

231. I don't think they can (nt)

[Algernon Moncrieff]

209. I don't keep score.

I may argue bitterly with a poster one day on one issue, and then be in complete agreement the next day on a different issue.

[seaglass]

214. Did you make this up? n/t

[McCamy Taylor]

215. Google, Amazon, Microsoft record everything we do. XBox now records what our kids look at.

So, I don't give a fuck if someone records what I recommend, but if anyone does not like it then just go through a recommend lots of random stuff.

[McCamy Taylor]

216. Is anyone "selling DU" recs yet the way they sell "likes" or Amazon "reviews"?

Cause if they did, we would get wild inflation, like a million recs. Would be very amusing. Recs would become meaningless, likes Marks during the Weimar era in Germany.

[Warren DeMontague]

219. I know that with every rec you get extra indigo energy points with added vitamin woo

You may not notice, but the Star Friends Lunar Colony sure as shit does.

http://www.reenagagneja.com/fran/

[malokvale77]

232. I love vitamin woo

It's the bestest.

[951-Riverside]

220. It's not creepy...

It's NSA.

[H2O Man]

226. There is a high

level of pathological behavior on this forum. And that's a shame. There's no need for it.

Recommended.

[tclambert]

228. You should keep a list of who's doing that.

I would, but I'm too busy keeping a list of characters George R. R. Martin has killed. It takes all my spare time.

[lumberjack_jeff]

235. Yup. Hey look here! Jeff recommended this one too!

[EarlG]

237. I think it was already pointed out earlier in the thread but

it's worth repeating: on everybody's profile there is a button that says "Recs" -- click that and you can see all their recommendations from the last 90 days.

Click this to see your own:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&sub=recs

Also if you click the number of recs at the bottom of the OP, you can see the usernames of everyone who recommended it. Here's the list for this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=thread&address=10025031306&info=1#recs

Point being, this is not exactly secret information.

[cyberswede]

240. Do you ever feel like a den mother for a troop of squirrelly adolescents?

I bet there's a lot of head shaking going on for you admins.

[grasswire]

244. I appreciate your participation in this thread.

Sincerely, it's nice to know that your toe is the water, even the little mud puddles.

The 90 day list doesn't explain how some members are able to call up pertinent history that may be years old. The use of google would not fully explain that either.

Of course, there are no rules against collecting history of posters. But, as you can see from the preponderance of comments on this thread, most respondents have a queasy feeling about it happening in a community of people who ostensibly share the same larger goals for America.

That's all.

[seabeyond]

251. so, you admit you have absolutely no evidence anyone is doing anything. people are queasy about....

a fabrication?

an advance search. some are better at doing an advance search than others. i saw it when on MIRT. me? i do a piss poor job with searches. i do not even try. others, consistently do an excellent job with searches.

administration set up these tools for people to use.

you have a thread you started, with false accusations, it has gone into meta over what?

nothing it sounds like.

[davidthegnome]

238. You're telling me! This is all very telling.

I'm telling how telling this is. Hmm. No, not sure where I was going with that.

Creepy? I don't know, I think it's kind of funny. I bet we've got DU'ers - especially the cute kitty picture posters (you know who you are) who keep running lists of everyone who recs their kitty. If you didn't, you go on some kind of list for people who don't like cute cats.

For the record, davidthegnome did not rec this thread. There were no cute kitty pics in it.

[bravenak]

257. You are too funny sometimes.

I just cracked up at how telling everything is.
List of people who don't like cute cats!

[UtahLib]

242. Lame conspiracy theory of the day. nt

[seabeyond]

252. i would say. fug. people are using the tools du administration set up for people to use.

outrage. i think so.

[BainsBane]

249. Seems to me if people are worried about others knowing which recs they've made

They shouldn't recommend at all. Recs are on your profile. Everyone can see them at anytime. They aren't exactly state secrets.
I admit that I look at rec lists of particularly offensive OPs to see who supports that view. Shall I be brought before a tribunal for thought crime?

[Major Hogwash]

255. Maybe you didn't know that Skinner's family is like the Addams family.

Except Earl plays the part of Lurch.

Now, that is creepy!!!



Oh, and I recommended this thread of yours. so now I guess I'm on someone's list.
Bwa-haha-ha!!

[seabeyond]

256. i wanted to say

in another thread



but, i didnt have enough coffee yet to type, and did not get back to it.

so



it has been forever since i saw you. was thinking about you days, ... before i saw that other post.

hoping all has been well.

[pacalo]

258. Yes.

[DeSwiss]

259. Creepy, no.

- But it sure as hell is anal-retentive. You sure this person isn't NSA?

K&R

[grasswire]

260. I am deleting this OP, to lock the thread.

It has turned quite squirrely, and was intended to simply be questions about something that worried some members. Now I have a better sense of what other DU members feel.

So keep calm, and carry on.