Anybody else getting asked to serve on DU juries more frequently than usual?

[PearliePoo2]

Maybe it's just "probabilities" or luck of the draw but Jeeeez...
I'm getting asked to serve nearly every day, where it used to be maybe twice a month.
99% of the time, I agree to be on the jury and 99% of the time, I concur with the majority of jurors too.
It's not that I'm on DU more often, either. My time spent on here has been pretty consistent over the 12 years I've been a member.
I wonder what's up?

[Blue_Tires]

1. That's good thing....

Especially since there are so many biased/shit jurors in every alert...

We need more level-headed folks to kind of negate that...

[chwaliszewski]

2. I'm being asked about 2 to 3 times per week.

[yeoman6987]

29. I've been asked the last 4 days. Only 1 time a day though.

Not sure if that's good or bad.

[Buzz Clik]

3. No.

I have ten hides. I'm like a convicted felon -- my rights have been suspended.

[PearliePoo2]

11. ^^lol^^

You're like the kid in school that says, "You can't play with me, 'cause I'm bad".

[Loudestlib]

16. I read your posts.

They used to ban people around here that post like you do.

[Buzz Clik]

19. Really? Give us an example of one of my posts that would have gotten me banned.

Please do!

[Loudestlib]

30. It's not a single post per se, it's the totality of your behavior.

The woman's backside in a bikini, vulgarities to other members, etc. It's always a good idea to remember that this is a public forum. Conduct yourself as you would in public.

[LanternWaste]

41. Pointing out valid flaws does indeed, require one to either accept them or ignore the messenger.

Pointing out valid flaws does indeed, require one to either accept them or ignore the messenger, regardless of how we rationalize our behavior as something other than what it is...

[Buzz Clik]

42. How I interact with other posters is really none of your damned business, is it.

How I interact with other posters is really none of your damned business, is it.

Regardless of how morally superior you view yourself.

[Mosby]

45. actually it is our business

Community standards and all that.

I really hope skinner has plans for posters with more than 5 hides after the primaries are over. Some of us actually make an effort to be civil, it's not that hard to stay under 5 even with the occasional bullshit hide.

[Scootaloo]

55. Right?

I'v had a few 'time outs" myself, sometimes from bogus hides, sometimes not. So it's not like I'm driven snow here. But.. .ten? I've seen people with fifteen or more, all earned through the sweat of their palms. It's amazing to me. And I'm with you, I hope that Skinner has special plans for these special people.

Maybe a custom, mandatory avatar!



What do you think?

[Fozzledick]

58. I think it would look good on you, but you'd probably just brag about it.

[Mosby]

68. I'm all for some sort of scarlet letter

Maybe a banner at the bottom that replaces their sig line saying - "Warning: I'm a bitchy little asshole that is incapable of making a cogent argument so I rely on personal attacks".

That and a graduated time out based on the number of hides, that works for me.

[polly7]

33. Yeah, me too. Which cell block you in?

Close enough to scoot down a file?



I miss serving on juries.

(you stole my gif that I stole! ).

[Fuddnik]

4. I was getting asked pretty regularly.

Then, after I got a couple of hides for some very lame posts, I haven't gotten called on in weeks.

I think there's a formula that reduces your odds by 20% for every hide.

[AgadorSparticus]

5. You must not have any hides or problems. Plus, you have a star.

I get asked a lot too. But not as much as you. And like you, I usually agree with the majority as well. Maybe I don't get asked as much because I don't have a star?

[liberal N proud]

6. I have been in the dog house for too long

Post hidden in the last 90 days and there has been a group that is rabid about alerting on the most trivial stuff and if you draw a jury that is in that camp, you get a hide.

[Arkansas Granny]

7. I just checked my inbox. I've been asked to serve 16 times this month to date.

Last edited Fri May 13, 2016, 04:47 PM - Edit history (1)

That's at least once a day and sometimes twice.

What's up is that we still have a primary race going on and some posters can't/won't engage a civil discourse. Others are so thin skinned that they take offense at anything that doesn't support their candidate. We've all seen some pretty outrageous comments being made on this board and we've seen posters who put the worst possible spin on innocent statements.

ETA: Just served on another jury at 3:45 CDT. 2nd time today. Month to date total is now 17.

[PearliePoo2]

9. Yes, I agree that is definitely a factor (Primary race going on)

Passions and tempers are red-lining right now. So there are probably more "alerts" being made.

[yeoman6987]

31. Wow! I've been asked 7 times this month per my in box

[Crabby Appleton]

8. 18 times in April

11 times in May so far, all out of GD: P

[monmouth4]

10. 4 times yesterday..n/t

[Renew Deal]

12. It picked up a lot all of a sudden around a month ago.

And it hasn't really cooled off.

[PearliePoo2]

13. Now that I'm learning from you all what the criteria is for being eligible for jury duty...

It's making sense.
I actually don't post very often (for as long as I've been here) so I don't get the opportunity to get "hides".
Plus, I learned the hard way, that I have to really, really resist the temptation to hit "send" on that email or "Post" on a comment if I've been drinking any wine or IPAs! But, hey, that's just me...

[hfojvt]

59. well I have the same eligibility ratings

but not nearly as many calls. Either you are spending more time here than me, or there is another factor or two making you more likely to be called. After all, at any given time there might be 100 people active on DU who have a 100% chance of serving on a jury, and only 36 who get called in an hour or something.

[Nye Bevan]

14. Yep. Much more than usual, often several times per day, which used to never happen.

Now that there are no suspensions for hides I think lots of people have racked up their hidden posts which reduces their chances of jury duty. Also Skinner has mentioned booting people from the jury pool because of bias. So those of us who are civil enough never to get posts hidden, and fair and unbiased in jury duty, are being asked to serve more.

[COLGATE4]

15. Every time I turn around.

[lagomorph777]

17. There are professional "cleanup crews"

Any time I post about Monsanto, there is a very high probability of getting reported.

[Nye Bevan]

20. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910274

[lagomorph777]

22. Exactly, and the characterization of some of those was inaccurate.

The cleanup crew in at least one case claimed I was referring to another poster. However, that "other member" came along AFTER THE FACT and self-identified as a Monsanto troll, thereby taking offense. Also, you could look at this, a completely frivolous complaint:

On Wed May 11, 2016, 08:38 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

The names that shall not be spoken here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027823030

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This person is upset that three of his posts got hidden for personally attacking other DU members. When he went to the Ask The Administrators forum to complain that Democratic Underground was secretly funded by Monsanto, Skinner explained why all of his posts were hidden. This OP is pure disruptive forum drama, nothing more. See link here for more info: http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910274

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed May 11, 2016, 08:47 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: OK, I'm not into the "history" of this poster, so I'm going to judge it on this as an individual post. And I say leave it. There were no personal attacks here.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yes, the alerter's comments are mostly true. But I see no TOS violations with this specific post. If this poster is so disruptive, contact MIRT.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Lame alert.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not sure why it is up there, but it is a cool graphic with an important message.

[Nye Bevan]

23. Yep, I alerted that thread to the hosts as Disruptive Meta which is why they locked it.

This was probably a more appropriate course of action than a jury hide.

[lagomorph777]

24. Awesome, great job.

You helped enormously in proving my point.



Naturally, following the same impartial logic you must have reported this discussion as completely meta too, right?

[Nye Bevan]

32. Nothing wrong with "meta".

What the rules prohibit is "disruptive meta", of which complaining about locks and hides, and claiming that DU is controlled by Monsanto trolls, would be examples.

[lagomorph777]

34. Ah, got it.

The "fun meta" which complains about jury duty caused by frivolous flagging is perfectly cool.

[Nye Bevan]

43. I read the OP more as an observation than as a complaint (nt)

[HuckleB]

53. LOL!

Skinner called out the nonsense, plain and simple.

Dang.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

21. That's because it's a huge conspiracy.

95% of DU are card-carrying shills for Monsanto. It's a lucrative deal. Too many of you are learning about it, however. So... The choppers are en route. See you soon!

[womanofthehills]

35. The shills love to name call - - - you know who posts DERP all the time

They love to call you stupid, crazy- and everything is a conspiracy theory and some of them run the health forum and the men's group.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

36. It's a big conspiracy.

We're coming for you, too.

[HuckleB]

54. If I recall...

... ad hominem attacks are not something you shy away from offering.

[fizzgig]

18. i'm getting tapped nearly every day

sometimes twice. it's mostly gdp and a lot of stupid alerts.

[Iggo]

25. Last week I was doing one a day, and a couple of times one in the morning and one at night.

This week it's back to my usual of about one every other day.

I've been a non-star member for quite a while now, and even though I'm on DU a ton, one a day is kind of a lot.

[Agnosticsherbet]

26. I have been serving once or twice a day, every day.

Most of those are on posts in GD-P.
I blame it on the divisiveness of the primary.

[Shrike47]

39. I have a very similar experience. I will be so happy when the primaries are over.

The savage attacks on each others candidates sound so very freepish.

[redstatebluegirl]

27. Yes, I noticed this as well.

[ismnotwasm]

28. A couple of times a day if I'm around.

I'm not posting much, and I've trashed GD-P, but I do check in.

[stopbush]

37. You can always check the profile box indicating you don't want to serve

on juries.

[PearliePoo2]

44. Yes, I could check the box (don't want to serve) but...

as I mentioned, I DO serve 99% of the time and my post wasn't really meant as a complaint. I'm more just blown away by the frequency of jury requests that I've never seen before.
I sort of feel like it's my duty to try to help keep this place civil and sane.
I feel the same way about donating to DU. My dollar contribution is very little, but I do enjoy the extra benefits having a star grants me.
Oh..and I LOVE this place, warts and all!
DU is my #1 "go to place" for news each and every morning.

[lpbk2713]

38. It might be because the available jury pool has shrunk.

I can only speak for myself but until about a month ago I would get at least one jury call every day, some times two. Now, as I say, there hasn't been one jury call in about a month. I checked my profile and nothing has changed that might impact jury service. Only thing I can figure ... I have seen Admins bemoan the fact that no one leaves comments with their jury vote. With this in mind I was sure to do so most of the time. I dunno, perhaps a host used their discretionary powers when they took umbrage to one of my comments. I have no explanation for it. I don't make personal attacks and I try to stay within the ToS. At any rate I haven't received any notification that I am no longer allowed to serve on DU juries but it is an undeniable fact that my service has not been needed for the past month or so even though I'm here for hours at a time some days.

[PearliePoo2]

46. That's interesting! Maybe you can make inquiries to see what's going on?

I rarely make a comment. Maybe 1 out of 20 times.
The alerted on post has to be pretty darn bad for me to write something. And actually pretty darn bad for me to vote to "hide" it too. I'm a lenient juror, I'll admit!

[Scootaloo]

60. I always leave a comment, hide or leave

I mean the option's there, so why not use it?

[riderinthestorm]

47. No. Haven't been asked in more than 2 months. I have 1 hide

There's a growing number of us Bernie supporters who haven't been asked in months.

[Scootaloo]

56. First, you're not a star member. That ups your chances by a bit

Also, you cannot sit on jury for people who you have on ignore, who you have on mail-block, or who have you on their jury blacklist.

[riderinthestorm]

61. Understood. I have a 60% chance iirc

I figure I'm on a lot of shit lists to not see an alert in more than 2 months...

[BigDemVoter]

48. Yes.

And the things we are asked to rule on are, more often than not, extraordinarily ridiculous. I have seldom seen more thin-skinned individuals--maybe pre-schoolers?

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. Skinner confirmed there are significantly more alerts after '5 hides=suspension' was dropped

The number of alerts and hides went up significantly after the so-called amnesty

I've served on 31 in the last 30 days.

[Mosby]

62. I don't understand his confusion

He removed the major consequence for uncivil behavior and uncivil behavior increased as a result.

What a shock.

He and the other admins have done some interesting stuff with the jury system, so I am looking forward to his changes after the primary. The rules definitely need to be simplified, that alone should make the jury system more efficacious.

[Adrahil]

50. Several times a day.

Almost always for GD issues.

[Omaha Steve]

51. 3-4 times a day now

That would be a yes.

[Greybnk48]

52. Yes. Several times a week and

some days, two three times a day! People are passionate about this election, so no surprise that snark escalates and tempers flare.

[hfojvt]

57. I've only served on seven in the last month

maybe it is a time of day thing. I believe my chance of serving is also 100% since I got a star in February.

[herding cats]

63. 12 times since May 1st.

Which I think is slightly more than normal. However, if you take into consideration that I read here much, much less these days, it's probably a sign of an increase in alerts.

I'm sure it'll settle down after the primary.

[muriel_volestrangler]

66. If you 'know' they're older than 90 days, then there's a bug in the system

You can look at them (there's a 'Show me my Transparency page' link), and show them to Skinner (I once got 2 'hides' for the same post, and Skinner removed one of them; they will correct bugs).

[pampango]

65. Oh yeah. And it's almost always GD-P posts that are alerted on. n/t