So using hidden misogynic sexual vulgarities to express disagreements, according to some, should be

[still_one]

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

not taken as seriously, and "banning is far too harsh" a penalty? Is it really? Does that also apply to racial attacks?

Reading various threads and posts, the defenses from, "they were not in their right frame of mind", to it "isn't that bad", really are just expressions of disappointment that a long term member, who many sympathize with went too far, and therefore should be forgiven.

If this happened to someone less popular would the feelings be the same?

This is a moderated forum, and a lot of latitude is allowed on many things, but when it comes to derogatory sexual inuendos or racial innuendos, implicit or explicit there has to be a standard, or what kind of people do we become, if that is the only way to express are disagreements?

[cwydro]

1. No.

No one would give a hoot if it was a less well known member.

That being said, I think a time-out might have been better.

However, his posts agains HRC were becoming more and more ridiculous. And I'm a longtime HRC supporter. On the fence at this point.

[still_one]

80. I am not sure about your first point. The shark might have been jumped

[IdaBriggs]

2. He had copied the words of a Troll so they would be seen once MIRT did their work.

The banning was, in my opinion, excessive. He has been here for seven years, acted as a volunteer moderator in multiple forums, and is a Star Member.

I believe context is important. In this case it appears to be a Mis-reading of the situation.

I hope the mods reconsider. I am disappointed in them for this one.

[RobertEarl]

3. He was anti-Clinton

Read the journal. I could not believe how anti-Clinton he was.

[IdaBriggs]

10. Who cares? She isn't the candidate yet, nor is Bernie, nor anyone else.

We are in the warm up to primaries, and discussing possible candidates on a discussion board with passion is kind of what happens around here.

[RobertEarl]

24. Exactly

The level of passion and emotion is getting crazy in here. Why we can't have calm discussions about this primary makes me wonder what the heck is going on.

Clearly the subject of 'today's greatest thread' was someone whose passion outran his sensibility. Seen others get damn close, like that thread painting Bernie as someone who blows off the deep racism in the US.

[LiberalElite]

31. Uh, so what he's anti-Clinton? Is that against the rules now?

Maybe another poster's claim that DU is becoming a Hillary site is not so ridiculous after all.

[Duckhunter935]

34. I think so

[LiberalElite]

41. This place is getting a little

1950's McCarthyish don't you think? - Complete with virtual (voting) loyalty oaths. I only joined DU in October 2012.

[Duckhunter935]

46. Yes, I am seeing that

And the annointed side can say nothing wrong

[still_one]

85. Which forum are you in? There are far more anti-Hillary threads, and most are not even locked

[still_one]

83. sorry, not so

[still_one]

81. That was not the reason

[krawhitham]

127. Which was the main reason he was banned

[HERVEPA]

6. Bull. No misreading.

He's been building up to this.

[PeaceNikki]

8. It's a spoonerism and he knew exactly what he was doing.

That's why he mentioned tongue twisting. It's a relatively well known one as well. Metallica has a documentary by the name, with the same charming meaning. Google it.

He meant it exactly as EarlG read it.

[IdaBriggs]

17. I spoke with him - he was copying the troll so the words would be saved

once MIRT did their duty. Yes, the TROLL really meant it; not the long time DU'er who RECOGNIZED a TROLL whose post was subsequently removed.

I am hoping the misunderstanding gets cleared up, with apologies/warning for others seen.

[PeaceNikki]

21. Ah, so he was DEFENDING Hillary? That would be rather out of character, but I suppose anything is

possible.

[boston bean]

27. LOL

[IdaBriggs]

28. He was playing with a Troll. He copied the (now deleted) post.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that in YEARS of posting he has never "name called" before, but when COPYING A TROLL'S POST he suddenly is a name caller?

We have lots of rude/abusive folks on this board; NYC_SKP has never been one of them in my experience. I believe this is a misunderstanding/mistake and I hope the mods bring him back.

[JTFrog]

49. Wrong. n/t

[PeaceNikki]

92. It sure appeared that he was agreeing with and laughing with the troll about the phrase.

"I say that to myself every day, over an over."

[herding cats]

48. That should be easy to prove.

I'm sure if that's the case there would be an alert he placed regarding the troll the admin can verify. That is if he was just copying the vile language of an obvious troll to expose them.

I'm going to say that premise doesn't mesh with the rest of his post in context, which leaves me skeptical as to how true it is or not. I find myself hoping you're teasing about him saying that was his intention, and he'll just apologize for losing his head in the heat of battle and get to return.

[misterhighwasted]

33. Thank you. This^

The only two times I've seen this particular spoonerism in my entire life.
Metallica & a post on DU.

[hifiguy]

69. It's more British than American.

I saw it used as an album title in the mid-Seventies by an English band known for its lyrical wordplay. It isn't new.

[Paka]

138. All of us aren't Heavy Metal fans.

It would have gone completely over my head. I guess now I can consider myself educated.

[Duckhunter935]

141. yep

I would have never picked up on anything.

[phil89]

142. Are references to Metallica bannable

offenses now too?

[PeaceNikki]

144. No, coy attempts at calling women cunts appears to be though.

[zappaman]

11. Bullshit.

[IdaBriggs]

19. No - TRUTH. I spoke with him earlier. nt

[JTFrog]

45. Actually....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026777709#post347

Troll's post:

Feel the Bern.

If she's not ready to handle spontaneous exchanges,

she is not fit for the Presidency. This is all smoke and mirrors, IMO. Yes, I am voting for Bernie but just thinking of her even pulling such a cunning stunt is pretty shockingly appalling.

I'm not sayin'--I'm just sayin'...

Skip's reply:

Welcome to DU, Feel the Bern! And yes, it's a Cunning Stunt!

I say that to myself every day, over an over.

It can be a tongue twister!

Your spin is not going to fly.

[IdaBriggs]

50. I believe him. It also reads to me like Playing With A Troll.

YMMV. Welcome to the Internet, where people have different opinions on what they read....

[JTFrog]

53. No it doesn't.

Not even a little bit.

But then some of us have been paying attention lately. That post fit right in with his way over the top Hillary bashing lately.

[zappaman]

58. No it doesn't.

He capitalized the C and the S and laughed that is was a tongue twister.

He knew exactly what he was doing and EarlG knew too.

[bettyellen]

63. He "decoded" the spoonerism for these guys and they still flail around saying they don't see it.

I'd admire them if they were honest- they want to give a "friend" a pass here and skirt standards.
But this right here is some grade A bullshit.

[herding cats]

65. Did he alert on that post?

If so then he has a chance at this defense, a really good chance. If not then his claim doesn't hold water. I'm sorry, I see you're in earnest now and not teasing. I also read you're friends, so I'm sorry for your friend being banned. That' sucks.

[Cha]

66. Well I don't believe him.. he's lying. Big surprise ..trying to weasel out of it now.

[Cha]

71. "And yes, it's a Cunning Stunt I say that to myself every day, over an over. It can be a tongue

twister".. Disgusting.. so "clever".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6776704

EarlG read it exactly right.

Thank you, JTFrog for the exact quotes.

[snagglepuss]

133. I'm not an HRC fan but found some of his posts OTT. That said

it seems clear to me that he was letting the troll know he knew exactly what she was up to.

It's clearly ironical. Sheeesh

[bettyellen]

52. Lol, Ida he is playing you- he understood the slur- and laughed in agreement. So now he's lied to

You as well. Awesome dude!

[IdaBriggs]

55. Sigh. Or my long time friend, with no prior history of EVER using such language

is telling the truth. Who am I going to believe? Him, or the flame war folk on the Internet?

[bettyellen]

59. How about reading the post and his reply/ where he agrees with the troll and clearly uses the

Spoonerism- pointing out its a tongue twister for those who have not heard it before.
It's pretty darned clear he understood the slur and enjoyed repeating it. Fuck that.

[zappaman]

61. And capitalizing the two words just to make sure everyone knew what he was saying.

Nudge nudge, wink wink.

[bettyellen]

79. You gotta love watching people twist into pretzels to play dumb

Reminds me of "I had no idea about chicken and watermelon", lol. Fucking hilarious.

[Bonobo]

96. Clearly YOU are having a field day filled with oodles of Schadenfreude. It isn't pretty.

You are sucking all the entertainment value out of it that you can. Enjoy.

[bettyellen]

109. I truly enjoyed seeing someone zapped for using c*nt

I don't care if it was Hillary herself doing it. Yay!!

The people pretending they can't see what Skip was kind enough to decode himself in the post - they are pretty fucking entertaining. The foolish gymnastics it takes to ignore the sexist crap is amazing! It's like watching the circus.

[bettyellen]

20. Don't cha love it when people play dumb. No context, no history....

Insisting it actually meant something else entirely when the post itself explains exactly what it was.

[glinda]

44. I see your statement as accurate.

[Cha]

57. No, he just wasn't as clever as he thought he was.

[KMOD]

123. Exactly.

[peecoolyour]

70. That's the way I saw it.

The person who was removed or whatever had the username of "Feel the Bern" and a picture of Sanders as their profile picture. The troll was intentionally trying to make Sanders supporters look bad.

It seemed more like NYC_SKP was defending us Bernie supporters from that troll's shenanigans than any kind of defense for Clinton.

[uppityperson]

89. Except that is not what happened. Here are the 2 posts. Not defending from a troll at all

Typically defending from a troll you do not say "welcome" like he did, or repeat back the words. Typically you call them on their shenanigans and/or alert to a jury.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026777709#post347
Troll's post:

Feel the Bern.

If she's not ready to handle spontaneous exchanges,

she is not fit for the Presidency. This is all smoke and mirrors, IMO. Yes, I am voting for Bernie but just thinking of her even pulling such a cunning stunt is pretty shockingly appalling.

I'm not sayin'--I'm just sayin'...

Skip's reply:

Welcome to DU, Feel the Bern! And yes, it's a Cunning Stunt!

I say that to myself every day, over an over.

It can be a tongue twister!

[uppityperson]

106. Did you know Admin and the MIR team members can see banned troll's hidden posts?

He knew since he has been a moderator and now on MIRT.

He also did not copy/paste what the troll said, but took the term, capitalized the first letters, and made a joke of it.

So no. You are wrong in what you are saying here.

[PeaceNikki]

107. And went on to say he says it to himself every day.

[uppityperson]

111. And has joked about it in the past about Sarah and Todd Palin.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7059909#7059935

[PeaceNikki]

117. Huh.

Color me unsurprised.

[DURHAM D]

4. It is not moderated and therein is the problem.

It is "community standards" as the jurors cast secret ballots thus causing DU to degrade more every day.

[Scootaloo]

5. The problem is that there ISN'T a standard

I've seen no shortage of racism and misogyny and other flavors of bigotry skate right by. some quite a bit more blatant and certainly more offensive.

if this is a banning offense, it needs to be applied evenly. if it's not, then what's going on?

[NanceGreggs]

35. Agreed 100%.

I keep wondering what "community standards" means - when those "standards" change from one post to the next, one jury to the next.

We've all seen it over time - a post gets "hidden" by one jury, when a virtually identical post gets a "leave alone" from a different jury, often within minutes of each other. In other words, there is NO standard against which posts are measured. If there were such a "standard" being applied, identical posts would fare the same in all cases.

[hifiguy]

7. There was no reason to ban him.

It's an old bit of English wordplay, not unlike Cockney slang, designed to result in a rude mispronunciation. Far more snide and toxic passive-aggressive sludge is allowed, again, and again, and again, A failed joke should be no cause for a ban.

[William769]

9. All that doesn't mean diddly squat if it's someone from a certain Group.

It's that plain. and simple. And that is really sad.

[GusBob]

12. Maybe some of this is attention seeking subject of the day bandwagon jumping

One poster can't even get the dude who is loved so much name right

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I will tell you what

when I see equal application of the rules, I will take this as not a political ban, but a TOS ban.

Given the fact some people get away with so much crap I no longer alert. or play jury... nope, this was the beginning fo the official purge for 2016.

I have seen things just as bad. And I will make you a promise, if the antisemitic whistles continue, or get worst, I will take my leave. You will not have to ban me. They are confirming to me the place tolerates antisemitic drivel

It is moderated, granted That is supposed to be against the TOS, but in effect, it is not. And that is just one example.

[Ed Suspicious]

75. I haven't heard the word "kike" since the 80's. Saw it on multiple occasions today.

A certain segment of the H crowd is really playing up Sander's "jewishness." To what end? I think I know the answer to that.

[sufrommich]

78. I find it very hard to very hard to believe that anyone

from the "H crowd" called Sanders that word and if you're going to make that accusation it should come with links. So where are they?

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. this is not the K word

and this was hidden, but quite nasty

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6774493

And yes, I have seen more of this kind of dog whistling crap.

I will grant you this, perhaps I am overly sensitive to it, since as a daughter of an actual survivor I am always on hyper alert and ready to flee. So I will grant you that, But I have seen plenty of these whistles, I do not alert on them, but they are out there.

Who is starting them, it is not just from one side, but they are out there.

IF Sanders wins the Presidency, just as we saw an increase in racism, we will see an increase in antisemitism.

[Ed Suspicious]

104. I might have made a mistake. the post that I could find was

upon further review, was pointing out that he was Jewish and that if somebody were to call him that word they would meet the same fate as the poster who was banned today for his comment about Clinton.

I Know that I've seen other references to his faith/ethicity as reasons why he won't be elected, but I think I'm going to retract my accusation in light of my faulty recollection of the post I referred to.

I apologize.

I think I'm starting to take all the drama surrounding the ban of one of the Sanders group's more influential posters to heart and I might be inadvertently seeking to confirm my bias.

I renounce my claim of H group's antisemitism.

[bettyellen]

131. Thanks - I wish the person claiming someone called Sanders a racist was as honest as you....

As it is, many have repeated that lie and it is vile.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. That and the play (hidden) that this place has become

hilaryrein, a play on judenrein.

I am not throwing my hat behind any candidate. (And when we do, none here will know) Antisemitism is on the rise, but there are the kinds of things that make me go hmm, DU, not enforcing the toss equally... so what is new?

And let me add this. Since Chelsea married a young Jewish man, I suspect HRC would be horrified by this as well.

[hack89]

14. Sexual vulgarities are common and accepted on DU

read any gun thread.

You are right - there should be a standard. Good luck getting one.

[Duckhunter935]

40. Very correct

It seems to be fine when it is against males. Can we say double standard 😉

[MicaelS]

47. No shit....

The penis slurs abound, and I have not yet seen anyone banned for that. If the same level of constant negative comments were made about female genitalia or breasts, the number of people being PPR would reach into the hundreds.

[Duckhunter935]

56. Yes, the selective outrage

is very interesting indeed. Some people should look at their posts on this and see the hypocrisy of their own words.

There is one DU member that has in his signature a picture about a small penis and a gun. That is just fine I guess as I have alerted a couple of times and never got any response. That signature line is still there today and seems to be just fine as it is against a male.

[still_one]

95. yeah, males compared to females have had it rough. From unequal pay, being treated and referred to

as sex objects in the workplace, in a country that wouldn't even pass the Equal Rights Amendment.....

[Duckhunter935]

99. So I guess that makes it OK

[still_one]

120. there is NO comparison. Women are the discriminated party in 99% of gender issues, NOT men

As far as DU is concerned, this is an owned site, where the owners have the right to ban anyone for any reason.

[Duckhunter935]

122. Yes they can

I agree with that. I just find it astonishing you seem to agree male bashing is fine. Myself I think it is wrong for both genders. I guess we will just have to disagree on this.

[cherokeeprogressive]

15. What would you call this?

It's graphic... It's insulting... If it's not misogynistic I'll eat my hat... and it was allowed to not only stand, it was complimented.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5784073

[LittleBlue]

25. Remember the Martin Bashir debate

Where numerous DUers agreed with Bashir that someone should shit in Palin's mouth and gag her? Many of those members weren't even hidden let alone instabanned.

Is that misogyny or not?

[cherokeeprogressive]

39. There was another Rude Pundit link posted where he called either Coulter or Bachmann "the word"...

I can't find it, but I posted many times about how it was wrong and the general idea and most of the responses were somewhere along the lines of (paraphrasing) "But it's mAnn Coulter! She IS a (insert word here)."

To answer your question, YES it was misogyny, but in the minds of many DUers it's to be excused when pointed in the right direction.

[Duckhunter935]

42. Selective enforcement

Sad

[still_one]

100. no doubt about it

[misterhighwasted]

16. We become free republic. That's who.

We are better than that, indeed.

[DrDan]

18. yep - there has to be a line . . . he got caught crossing it

and he knew where that line was

[LittleBlue]

22. I have yet to see a single DUer claiming that word is acceptable

What they are saying is that a long-time DUer with miles of progressive cred should be given a second chance.

[hifiguy]

26. One strike and you're out is ridiculous.

[LittleBlue]

32. Yep. By that standard many of us would be toast

if we were judged in our worst moments

[hifiguy]

36. I was once attacked for being Asperger's after I disclosed it,

not that I keep it a a secret. The attacker wasn't banned for that but was eventually banned when she told Skinner to go fuck himself in a post.

[LittleBlue]

54. Jeez

Talk about double standards

[steve2470]

114. that was a really horrible attack on you

If not an outright ban, at least a suspension with a requirement for some serious public repentance.

[misterhighwasted]

72. Any longtime DUer should have known better.

I believe the banned poster actually used that same line on me.
And he has been here far longer & in far more involved a capacity than I.

[Bonobo]

94. That is correct. nt

[Spazito]

23. I can't help but wonder if the target of the ugly mysogynistic post had been...

Elizabeth Warren instead of Hillary Clinton if those excusing the banned poster would be so willing to defend him and minimize what he did in his post .

The banned poster had been a long term moderator before DU3 and the jury system was instituted so would be VERY aware of what he was doing and the possible consequences, imo.

[Cha]

62. If someone had said that about Elizabeth Warren.. they wouldn't be calling to get the person back.

Is exactly what I've been thinking Spazito..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=8304

[Spazito]

76. Yep, I suspect the response would be quite different...

double standards abound lately, imo.

[Cha]

77. I know it would be. Double Standards, exactly.

[mother earth]

29. A time out would have sufficed. I would feel the same if the male version were used.

Yes, it's vile, but a banning forever is a bit much.

I've seen a lot worst play out over the years & it was tolerated, what because a certain word isn't used it is more acceptable?
BS. Some of the best assholes carry on over and over with trolling and drivebys & it goes on and on. I know it is difficult to police these boards, but NYC has been here for years. So now he's banned because he used poor judgement and a vile word. Yeah, overkill on this one.

That's all I'm saying on the subject.

[joshcryer]

30. Hidden insults are common.

I get them daily.

The problem is people keep testing the waters and seeing how far they can go. It's creating a really ugly environment.

I think EarlG was right to ban to send a very powerful message, however, I think it should be reversed. Reality check heard loud and clear. SKP would apologize. The coy smears would maybe slow down.

[mother earth]

37. What's bothersome is the celebration. There's a bit more at play here, imho. The boards have been

like a warzone, and sides have been drawn by who you support.

[joshcryer]

73. It's just sad.

Why people insist on drawing these lines. This sucks. And yes I like SKP but I do think what he said was over the line and hurtful.

[Man from Pickens]

38. Anyone seen Dick Cheney?

It's a difficult conundrum to avoid seeing the potential for the country to be controlled by such a controversial figure.

[MohRokTah]

43. I think being reinstated should be possible.

Such reinstatement must be initiated by the perpetrator and would still be subject to review by the admins.

[Texasgal]

51. As someone who has been here a long time

this whole debacle is interesting. There have been many, many GOOD DU'ers that have been banned in the past ( Gay purge anyone?)

[ScreamingMeemie]

60. Not a day goes by on DU that I don't remember 13 people banned in about 2 hours.

It's why/when I stopped taking this place very seriously.

[Texasgal]

64. Thank you!

I miss ALOT of those folks very much! The drama and the crazy posts surrounding skip kinda pisses me off... I remember the bans and it was NOT pretty.

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Yup, this place is rather hysterical at this point

[demmiblue]

103. Shoot, I remember when linking to hate sites was not allowed...

and then the admins created one.

The LGBT purge was DU at it's lowest point, from my recollection (I lurked for four years before I signed up in 2008).

[City Lights]

108. "I remember when linking to hate sites was not allowed...and then the admins created one."

[demmiblue]

125. Some people get more 'pragmatic' as they age..

especially when money is involved.

I have nothing against people wanting to earn enough money to keep their families comfortable, as well as setting up a college funds for their kids. But...

[Scootaloo]

105. What's this now? Gay purge?

[Texasgal]

116. You haven't been here long enough to know the

history.

Google gay purge on DU and you will find all the answers.

[Rhythm]

140. I was thinking the same thing, Tex... especially in light of all these

'discussion' threads about the merits of banning NYC_SKP, or the grave-dancing ones.

I remember during "the Purge", one person was banned for simply posting the roman-numeral VII, which was the ban-count at that moment...
And now we apparently are allowed a whole page-full of of celebrations and second-guessings.

Who knew?!

(and how the hell did ~i~ not get a granite pizza that day?!)

[Kingofalldems]

67. If I said it I would expect to be PPRed.

[Cha]

74. If it were said about Eliazbeth Warren.. they wouldn't be calling for him to come back.

[Prism]

88. You once called Hillary Clinton "morally depraved"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5692646&mesg_id=5699469

I think a lot of people need to trade in their high horses for at least a mid-sized pony.

[City Lights]

90. Interesting find...nt

[Prism]

91. Comparing 2008 to now is endless entertainment

And hey, people change their minds. No biggie. But some of this, "How dare you be so mean to Clinton!?" from some quarters is hi-larious.

The archives are pure comedy.

[City Lights]

98. That find was a gem, for sure!

I haven't spent any time searching the archives, but can imagine the goodies I'd find if I did.

Gonna be a long primary season...sigh.

[herding cats]

110. I know several people who didn't support Hillary in 2008 who are now.

Some vehemently in both instances. That's politics.

Dredging up posts from someone in 2007 reminds me of all the people posting old grudges against NYC_SKP in his ban thread today. It's ugly and it wasn't topical. It was just a chance to play gotcha against someone they disagreed with on some perceived slight.

[Prism]

113. Not gotcha, but an illustration

People get heated in primaries and say heated, hostile things. It happens. I'm no innocent either.

But the pooh poohing from a lot of people, as if their records are sparkling examples of civility, is a tad much.

Very few of us are lambs around here.

[Cha]

136. Exactly.. you didn't get me at all.. I don't mind.. someone already brought that post up to me..

and I talked about it.. not the same at all as what skp slurred.

[herding cats]

137. The thing is we are in control our words and actions.

Even when we choose not to exercise that control, it's still there. I don't do negative politics against other Democrats. It's not who I am, nor who I will ever be. So, I don't get a lot of what takes place on here. I admit I hide threads I think are only intended to be antagonistic. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. I'm just saying it doesn't appeal to me, personally. I may get mad a someone and act the jerk over an issue. OK, I DO get mad at people and act the jerk. But I usually regret it pretty fast and swallow my pride and apologize when I realize I'm being an ass. Even if I still don't agree with them on the point, being a jerk to someone isn't going to make them agree with me anytime soon.

This has been an odd experience here today. Heated debate is one thing, but calling a Democratic presidential candidate the C word isn't debate. It's petty and childish, and the sort of ugly thing we adults shamefully do on occasion, but should have have the decency to regret and apologize for almost instantly. People are upset for his choice and for the choice to ban him for it. I think both sides have valid points to an extent.

[Cha]

134. And, turns out he wasn't the only one who brought that post up to me..and I talked about it here..

I don't mind.. That was then and this is now.. mahalo, herding cats.

"Yes I was pissed at her. I think she's learned a lot since Mark Penn was running her campaign

And, the IWR vote.. Things change.. people learn and grow or they're stagnant.

I have too.. wow, I was out of control! "Two Americas" didn't turn out so good, though.

I started liking her after she graciously conceded at the Dem Convention and then after President Obama appointed her as SOS.. she did a brilliant job. They put aside their differences and came together for the country and so did I. I can certainly change how I feel about people over the years. This isn't the first time.

I haven't exactly settled on a candidate yet but now I don't like the slimey posts about the Dem candidates. So I'm all for these positive Posts Agschmid is making about Hillary."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6770547

[herding cats]

139. Cha, I'm stil on the fence so far.

I do hope if we end up on different sides we can still be friendly.

In 2008 my friend was the top Hillary supporter and I was the top Obama supporter in our district. We'd both had media coverage as we sold our choices. To make a long story short we ended up in the news hugging each other after the primary was finished. We were already friends, but that wasn't the story. It was because of all the manufactured BS about how we were supposed to hate each other, which we obviously didn't. We rode to the state convention together even.

I don't do negative politics against other Democrats. So, I'm hoping no matter what I can maintain my friendships here.

[Cha]

143. Of course we'll still be friends.. I'm friendly with the Bernie Supporters who are calling out the

viciousness of some of them against Hillary. They are turning me off.

You will maintain your friendships, herding.. you're that kind of person. Some of the best people I like here now were Hillary Supporters when I was for Obama.. and we went round and round!

Great story about you and your friend, on different sides, in '08 in the local paper! Good times!

[Cha]

129. So? I've already talked about that here.. And, if you think "morally depraved" is the same as..

"Welcome to DU, Feel the Bern! And yes, it's a Cunning Stunt!

I say that to myself every day, over an over.

It can be a tongue twister!

Then you don't know what a stupid, insulting misogynist slur is.. and as I was saying.. If it had been Elizabeth Warren.. nobody would want the person back including me.

"Yes I was pissed at her. I think she's learned a lot since Mark Penn was running her campaign

And, the IWR vote.. Things change.. people learn and grow or they're stagnant.

I have too.. wow, I was out of control! "Two Americas" didn't turn out so good, though.

I started liking her after she graciously conceded at the Dem Convention and then after President Obama appointed her as SOS.. she did a brilliant job. They put aside their differences and came together for the country and so did I. I can certainly change how I feel about people over the years. This isn't the first time.

I haven't exactly settled on a candidate yet but now I don't like the slimey posts about the Dem candidates. So I'm all for these positive Posts Agschmid is making about Hillary."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6770547

[lonestarnot]

87. Then why is racist crap still standing w/o even a hide after approximately 3 alerts? I don't get it

[Bonobo]

93. I actually DO think that one's entire history here should be considered.

IF this is a community of people as well as just a discussion board, we should take into consideration the totality of a person's history here.

I think you know a certain person who was allowed back here after the discovery they had gamed the alert system using a sock puppet right? She was allowed back why? Because I think her contributions were considered as part of the decision-making process.

In the same vein, I think that one mistake should not outweigh over 13 years of contribution and belonging to our community.

[NanceGreggs]

101. I have to respectfully disagree ...

... and I do mean "respectfully", because I have no doubt that you are speaking from the heart.

"If this happened to someone less popular would the feelings be the same?"

Probably not. But DU can't claim to be a "community" on one hand, and then refuse to acknowledge that a long-time member of that community doesn't deserve to have their words assessed in light of their many years of behaviour as a member thereof.

Personally, I did not find SKP's play-on-words to be particularly offensive. And I say particularly in light of the other things that have been allowed to be posted here over the past few years. I have seen a Democratic president, along with other well-respected Dems, accused of things that even FR would shy away from.

"A lot of latitude is allowed on many things, but when it comes to derogatory sexual innuendos or racial innuendos, implicit or explicit there has to be a standard."

Well, therein lies the problem. Under the jury system, there is NO standard. The posts that are hidden or allowed to stand are being determined by juries that all too often base their decisions on who they like, who they agree with, who they don't agree with, and who they deem to be a member of their particular clique.

I have to wonder what "standard" is being applied when a long-time poster is banned for saying something considered "unacceptable", when so many truly abhorrent things are said here on a regular basis and are not only left standing, but are kicked 'n rec'd, and displayed on the Home Page for all to see.

[still_one]

112. I do think the jury system has brought down the standards of DU. I refuse to serve on it because it

has become so crammed with personal bias, instead of ruling on the validity of a post, and that defeats the whole mechanism of fairness, because it is dependent on the bias of those randomly selected to serve.

I understand the philosophy, which is in general the standards of the "community" to determine what is acceptable for the most part, but that definition is too variable

in the real world when one serves on a jury for a civil or criminal case, they are supposed to base their decision on the "law". There is no clear standard with the DU jury system

[MannyGoldstein]

102. Rule of thumb: when dealing with long-time posters

who are well-known and well-loved, it's critical to always assume the worst intent.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

121. How many old timers became bug goo on the windshield the last time?

[BlueJazz]

115. My personal opinion: A lot of people are making the banning of someone too complicated.

The people that own this site are the true Standard regarding conditions of use. I'm sure they respect our input but it's entirely up to them whether a person's post is destructive toward the site...or not. From what I have experienced and have seen, they're also rather fair and forgiving.

[Renew Deal]

118. As you said, the admins are fair and forgiving

They also understand this place very very well.

[StevieM]

119. Can someone please explain something to me?

I'll start by stating my bias. I am a Hillary supporter, going all the way back to 2007.

I know that NYC Skip wasn't. And that he alluded to a bad word when describing her, or something like that.

Here is my question:

Isn't this something that can be resolved? Can't he appeal the decision? Is he allowed to apologize, serve a suspension and then get reinstated so that he can post here again?

[truebrit71]

124. I especially like the one where they are getting prayers....

... utterly despicable...

Using the c word is waaaaaaay out of bounds.... end of story.

[Quackers]

126. I don't care about the punishment he got.

I would just expect the punishment to be the same for all members. Site Google that word and see the consiquences for other members. The punishment should be equal for everyone.

[Duckhunter935]

130. yep

That is my issue, does seem to be selective

[mother earth]

132. He didn't use the word, it was a "spoonerism" which means it was judged his intent was to use the

word, but in actuality was not. That intent is what was ruled on.

[Quackers]

135. So insinuating a word should carry a harsher punishment than saying the word itself? nt

[jeff47]

128. Google reveals there are 1,180 posts with that word on DU.

And that doesn't count using stars or underscores to hide it. Just all four letters right in the open.

Admins better get busy.

[ScreamingMeemie]

145. So today is the day a standard was set, eh?

Not the umpteen diddley times the word has been (actually) used before?

I am no fan of NYC SKP, but this ban is nothing but bias.

[one_voice]

146. locking..

it's the consensus of the hosts that this is meta and doesn't fit the SOP for GD.