A note on Jury Service. (edited)
Last edited Mon Jun 23, 2014, 10:24 PM - Edit history (9)
Please, PLEASE jurors, let the buffoons deservedly reap what they sowed. Don't hide their posts. Allow their ridiculous posts to get the shitstorm of disapproval they deserve through replies to those posts.It seems to me that we may have recently passed the tipping point at times of being too quick to hide posts as jurors. I serve on juries and about the only thing that will get me to vote "hide" is if a person used the typically banned "n-word," "c-word," or was overtly bigoted, racist, homophobic or misogynist. Yet, I still allow quite a bit a leeway for those opinions if they do not venture into the "stone the heretics" territory. And yes, there have been some of the most vile posts about killing, maiming and otherwise harming others here on DU that certainly deserved to be hidden and their author banned. I would happily vote to ban them and did so when I was on MIRT.
I read the alerted post in context of the thread and in context of the post to which the person replied. If someone is a bit bigoted, racist, homophobic or misogynist then I feel a response to their post is more in order than hiding it. We cannot battle ignorance by ignoring and hiding it.
If you serve on a jury you MUST be willing to read the WHOLE thread and the context in which the alerted post was entered upon that thread. You cannot just read the single post that was alerted upon and make judgement.
Vulgar language is not going to get me to vote to hide a post.
When someone posts something that many of us think is out of bounds of normal discourse, that's not necessarily out of bounds with the TOS of DU.
I'd find it far, far better to leave their posts public and make intelligent responses to them rather than just hide them. How else can we hope to educate? Some people we'll be able to educate and change point of views. Others will be hopeless. We just have to recognize the difference between the two and put our efforts toward education.
If we continue to try to hide EVERY post we find objectionable this will no longer be a discussion board. It will be a campfire with all of us holding hands and singing "Kum Bah Ya"
I don't think that is what any of us desires. I think we are here on DU because we like lively debate. So don't squelch debate, but feel free to berate what you believe is nonsense and keep that nonsense public just to ensure everyone can see the paucity of some people's arguments.
ON EDIT:
Thanks BainsBane for pointing out where I was just wrong.
I'll admit that I was wrong about reading the "whole" thread. The content of a sub-thread between a couple or few people is usually enough to get the context and make a proper decision on an alerted post.
However, I still scan the whole thread for tone. To me, at least, that is important.
On Edit 2:
This OP was only meant to share how I do things and how I feel we ALL may need to adjust our thoughts from time to time. Why else would be here on DU if we didn't want a lively debate and an opportunity to have our beliefs challenged? We need not take offense to such challenges. We should appreciate them. I know I do when I stop being pissed off about those challenges to me.
I apologize if this was taken as some sort of instruction manual for people. That was not at all my intent. It was, however, my intent to get people on juries to think a bit before hitting the "hide" and offering no explanation of why they voted to hide. I find that very frustrating.
My intent, in concert with the purpose of DU, was open debate and have a discussion. Not at all to be overlord of sorts telling anyone what they should or should not do.
= new reply since forum marked as read
and kumbaya? 
I agree with you. I seldom hide anything.
When I served on MIRT it was great to have the debate among others about a post and a new person who might be a troll.
The debate opened my eyes to other views than my own. There were times when I brought something to the MIRT forum and people there convinced me I was not reading the post in the way it was intended. So I voted to leave it. There were other times I argued my case and we banned someone. Seeing both possible sides of an argument is something that is very, very difficult for us humans to learn. Out instinct for preservation tends to cause us to form an opinion and stand by it no matter what. That, in the past, served us well. After all, we've survived so far.
So I try, I really try, to take that experience into account when I'm on a jury.
Not "dick", "penis". 
Fortunately, it was shot down 5-2.
But obviously I think it's a good reason to hide. 
Sounds like a discussionist type board. Can't stand that forum.
I don't feel that trolls, bigots, disruptors and the likes should have free reign on DU. I prefer some community standards and repercussions for those who repeatedly make DU suck.
And, by the way, juries uphold community standards, not the TOS of DU. A post does not have to violate TOS to be alerted or hidden. Also, juries get called for only one of the four "Reasons for your alert" options (This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate).
There are some thin skinned peeps in here, and the LOVE to alert on basically nothing. I know of 3 DUers who have told me that if they get to jury they ALWAYS VOTE TO HIDE. Regardless., and that just ain't kosher! Can't we all just get along?
I'm a tech geek from WAY back before there was an internet. So I'm pretty much a geek and I love ARS Technica, Slashdot and other sites.
It's a little more black and white on those forums than here on DU. One may certainly have an opinion about things on those forums but others will be quick to present empirical evidence to the contrary (well, not always. there is a lot of poop slinging). Empirical evidence is hard to dispute if one is a true scientist or one who holds the scientific method in high regard. As I do. One can set up tests of scientific theories about "hard" technologies much more easily on computers and hardware than tests of the minds of people and the hordes of people. Though the computer simulations of people and masses of peoples have come so far as to be truly frightening.
DU is a lot more fluid and not so rigid as the science of computers and technology. Where it is either a 1 or a 0 at any particular time in those fields; binary doesn't really apply to people. Perhaps the things we continue to discover about quantum mechanics and the sub-atomic particles that I never learned even existed when I was in school will eventually lead to models of the universe that explain the random nature of humans. Did I get deep there or what? LOL!
My first hidden post was due to incorrect forum. My heart sank. Admittedly, aghast it forced me to respect the community overall. I know I am a very different person in my perception and opinions so I rarely expect to be understood. I try with reads, recs (sic) and kicks to support the community. The words, tone, context as well as intent are all helpful points of analysis of language samples.
And then there is "needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few" concept. Personally, I am rarely surprised by trouble. When I stop loving DU, I cannot imagine.
Thank you for your interesting and informative post with its subsequent threads.
Love, Peace and Shelter. littlemissmartypants
