When you hide nadinbrzezinski, DU has officially lost it ...

[pbmus]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Agschmid (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Original Post ..

nadinbrzezinski (135,226 posts)

The US advances to the 16 [View all]

In spite of flat playing

A Jury voted 4-3 to hide this post on Thu Jun 26, 2014, 01:00 PM. Reason: This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. When the original post in a discussion thread is hidden by Jury decision, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted. Hide post

[Logical]

1. More complaining about the DU, great! n-t

[pbmus]

4. You are just flat playing the DU card ... nt

[pintobean]

2. No one is above community standards.

No one.

[pbmus]

7. having an opinion on DU is a hideable offense ...

[Logical]

12. Yes! It is. Many times. n-t

[Nye Bevan]

75. Yep. Many opinions are hideable offenses.

Do you have an issue with that?

[Xipe Totec]

11. I no longer participate in Juries. nt

[treestar]

46. Agreed!

I resent that some people should be above them because they are popular with some people who think they are above everyone else.

[DeSwiss]

65. Sure there are.

Every system has those who are above it.

[FSogol]

71. +1 n/t

[villager]

3. It may have been the most chickenshit "hide" in the entire history of DU

Which, as it stands, is really saying something

[KittyWampus]

10. No, I'd say hiding my post for using the word 'ratfucker' because it is supposedly

homophobic is the most chickenshit.

And that also happened to one other DU'er.

She posted a spoiler and could have quickly edited it out.

[villager]

21. We may need a Letterman Top 10 of "most chickenshit 'hides'"

...though of course with our "jury" system here, many entrants would be eligible...

[redqueen]

39. Most people somehow manage to move on with their lives after a bad hide

Without throwing fit and without dozens of other dramariffic threads about it, too.

Imagine that.

[villager]

49. You seem to be throwing lots of fits about the "fits" lately

Perhaps you could model the "moving on" for us?

[redqueen]

59. LOL! Oh, do I?

At least I'm not startong yet another thread about this nonsense. And this is the last kick your silly bait will get from me.

[villager]

73. Replete with the LOL, but nonetheless...

...thanks for walking the walk!

[KittyWampus]

5. So she is somehow sacrosanct? DU officially 'lost it' when it ran Nance Greggs off.

BTW it takes FIVE hides to get a time out.

She wasn't nailed for just one post.

[Logical]

9. I don't understand the complaining about her being banned. She caused it. No one else. n-t

[tammywammy]

14. She's not banned. Just temporarily suspended. n/t

[greatauntoftriplets]

35. Exactly.

And she'll be back in a month.

[pbmus]

16. having an opinion about how a soccer team plays is not a hideable offense ...nt

[KittyWampus]

18. when you post a spoiler, it is. She could have quickly changed it, btw.

[rudolph the red]

20. Is that why you think her post was hidden?

[Logical]

22. SHE HAD 4 OTHER HIDES!!!!!!!! Get it yet? n-t

[pbmus]

25. these days stating your opinion on DU is hideable which is ridiculous...

that is why I usually post only others posts , not mine ...

[bahrbearian]

80. Keep it up LOL

[cwydro]

23. agree nt

[FSogol]

66. Exactly. The blame lies squarely on herself and not her imagined enemies. n/t

[cwydro]

32. yup.

exactly, and ditto here.

[RobertEarl]

6. Another hide-worthy thread n/t

[pbmus]

19. Yeppers, fer sere, RE, hide me ...nt

[redqueen]

8. OMG really?

[Rex]

13. 4 people on a jury do not represent all of DU.

Hopefully this will get people interested in their blacklist. Mine is full.

[1StrongBlackMan]

15. Someone help me ...

I have had me share of disagreements win her, over the years; but how did that post merit a hide?

[Logical]

24. Many jurys are wrong. It is just the way it goes. But no one whines about it. n-t

[pbmus]

27. Political Correctness on DU ... LMAO ...

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

42. I don't even understand why it was considered a spoiler.

I thought 'spoilers' occurred with time-delayed events, not things people watched in real time. If you watch a sporting event and post the score AFTER the end of the game, that doesn't seem like a 'spoiler' to me. You get 'spoilers' during the Olympics, when they're halfway round the world and time-delay broadcast for many hours.

[1StrongBlackMan]

61. That's what I was thinking ...

Maybe the alerter wanted the thrill of being informed of the outcome on the nightly news coverage rather than on-line? Or, maybe they were recording the game and walked around all day actively avoiding any discussion of, or person that might have watched, the match.

Seems kind of silly to me.

[BainsBane]

17. Okay, I disagree with that hide

But WTF? "When you hide nadinbrzezinski, DU has officially lost it"? People get bad hides all the time. Is it really necessary to point out how you see this member as more important than the rest of us?

[Xipe Totec]

37. Misery loves company? Is that your defense?

I just saw the hidden post.

That jury was pathetically brain dead.

Judging by it, I would say DU has officially lost it.

I've had posts hidden in the past and if I really strain myself I can see it from the alerter's perspective.

But this was a completely inoffensive post, hidden because "Amurika!"

[BainsBane]

41. And we had eight threads about it yesterday

She has gotten two hides since, leading to several more threads. According to this OP, it would seem she should be above censure.

I had two posts hidden for this: Amazingly, DU survived. There have been all kinds of crap hides. Only people rarely give a shit, yet I'm supposed to be in mourning over this? Give me a break.

[Xipe Totec]

45. Amazingly, DU survived.

Not because of the Jury system, but despite it.

[BainsBane]

57. Believe me, I am not a fan of the system

I've been on the bad side of it too many times, and I've seen it used unfairly against others. What I object to is the selective outrage.

[Xipe Totec]

68. Reputation, past history, and context matters.

I've lost faith in the jury system completely.

I do exercise selective outrage. I do discriminate based on reputation, past history, and context.

I would do the same for you , if it came to my attention.

Not all members of DU are equally deserving. They gain and lose points based on their post history.

That's all we have to go by.

[pbmus]

50. it could be time for some changes in our hide system ... nt

[BainsBane]

54. I've been saying that for ages

The jury system is fraught with bias. Too many vote on personality rather than content. The administrators won't admit it though because the system frees up their time. I doubt it is going anywhere.

[pintobean]

69. That's not why they were hidden.

You agreed with a post that said that a DUer could have been a mass murderer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024995511#post3

[arcane1]

70. I don't think 4 jurors and 1 alerter is enough of a sample to say "DU has officially lost it"

That's a fraction of a fraction of DU.

[Xipe Totec]

74. And yet, it's the fraction of a fraction that mattered, isn't is?

That's the point here.

This randomly selected minority is disrupting DU; the very purpose for which juries were created was to prevent disruption and they have become the disruptors.

Let that sink in for a moment.

[JI7]

26. who cares ? people get bad hides all the time and they don't start multiple threads about it

making themselves out to be some victim.

[Logical]

28. Hey! I agree with you for once!! :-) nt

[pbmus]

31. The alert problem has gotten out of hand on DU ...

when every opinion is alerted, there is something wrong with the blog ....

[JI7]

38. the problem has already existed in other cases but people didn't start multiple threads over it

and disrupt the entire board over it.

and she does this a lot. even if someone disagrees or criticises something she feels the need to start multiple threads about how people are being horrible to her.

[pbmus]

44. what, she did not ask me to start a thread ... this is me looking at DU

being a member and looking at another members opinion ... she called no one a Ahole or said anything about another DUers credentials being fake or called anybody out, she simple stated the obvious, that the USA soccer team played flat ...

[JI7]

48. so what ? others have gotten hides for stupid shit also, and she had many other hides, it wasn't

just that one.

there was also the time she started filling the board with cat threads and other non sense. i can understand those people posting those type of threads sometimes and they really want to show people.

but she did it just to disrupt and fill up the entire board with it. she could have included many of those images in one thread.

[pbmus]

51. oh lordy, here we are, getting back at nadin for posting cat pics....nt

[JI7]

56. no, she was getting back at others by posting the cat pics and other stupid shit

there are people who post things like that because they just really want to show others. there is nothing wrong with that.

but she had to do it in a way to fill up the board with them and make a point about how she was not going to post serious things anymore because people attack her . it was just another ways of her making her out to be a victim.

[FSogol]

77. "she called no one a Ahole or said anything about another DUers credentials being fake"

Um, her 4th hide was for calling someone a sock puppet.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5156323

Wanna defend her? Fine, but let's be honest about it.

[HooptieWagon]

78. The problem exists... if no one complains...

... then it will continue to exist. There are far too many frivolous alerts and bad juries. A good start to fix the problem would be to eliminate anonymous alerts. If someone is truly "offended", let that be publicly known.

[1000words]

29. Each day, DU finds new and different ways to amuse.

[Boom Sound 416]

30. Unrec

[MohRokTah]

33. I think 4-3 hides should hide, but should not count towards time outs.

It should be 5 votes and above towards time outs.

4-3 decisions could easily be 3-4 based upon random selection.

7-0 decisions should count twice towards time outs.

[pbmus]

36. and someone should look at the alert and say BS or no BS before the community looks at it ...

[IronGate]

34. What? When did this happen?

And why would that post be hidden?

[Gormy Cuss]

40. When someone loses it over a bad hide

getting a 5th hide shouldn't come as a shock.

[SidDithers]

43. Oh FFS. Lots of DUers have had hidden posts...

How a poster reacts to their hide tells a great deal. Doubling, then tripling down is usually a bad idea.

It certainly was in this case.

Sid

[PeaceNikki]

47. No shit. Some of us even manage to post without getting any. crazy.

[leftstreet]

64. Holy crap I actually agree with you

What's with all the hair-on-fire over this?

FFS

[uppityperson]

52. Time out is after 5 hidden posts, not one.

[PeaceNikki]

53. She had four other hides, you know.

[arcane1]

55. DU will have lost it when they hide me.

[Brickbat]

58. The more hides you get, the more you gamble when you double down.

[Renew Deal]

60. She got a hide for a soccer post?

[arcane1]

62. I think it was due to a spoiler alert in the subject line.

Reason #9,537 why I can't stand soccer

[KamaAina]

63. It's not so much hiding her

although this does appear to have been personally motivated.

It's about hiding her over something as trivial as a sports score.

[wercal]

72. Hi Nadine

I'm pretty sure you said you blocked me (don't remember why). But to whatever alias you may be using now, hello!

[demmiblue]

76. Lol!

[DeSwiss]

79. Yeah it's long gone.

- The inmates are running the asylum.

K&R

[Agschmid]

81. Locking, post does not fit within the stated SOP for the forum, hosts have come to consensus.

Please feel free to send a DUMail to locking host to appeal if you'd like.