DU is but a shadow of what it used to be.

[7wo7rees]

Last edited Thu May 19, 2016, 11:41 PM - Edit history (3)

So many great members are no longer here.

For so many reasons.

The vitriol is hard to take.

I hope we can find a way to come back together and be the community we used to be.

On edit:
I have been out all day so sorry for not being here to respond to so many great posts. I feel somewhat validated. This community will find a good and decent way forward.
I just do believe. Kumbaya and all that.
Thank you to all the DU'ers that have posted in this thread. Love you all. It seems.as though decency and civility has prevailed.

[7wo7rees]

2. Just curious? How long have you been lurking? And

what exactly made you decide to sign in in the last day?
Just curious as to your motivation.

[7wo7rees]

4. This site does. Welcome. Good luck.

Keep your head down. It is brutal round here these days. Be discerning and cautious and you will do fine.

[lovemydog]

5. Welcome here.

Have fun!

Agree, it can be a great place, interacting with others with different viewpoints.

There's some great folks here who enjoy doing the same.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. Yeah, don't judge the place based upon how it is at this.... exact moment.

"Gee, I've always wanted to check out a bar"

[7wo7rees]

123. Thank you, for all your wisdom in this thread. :)

[RKP5637]

151. Sure is similar!!! n/t

[Sherman A1]

6. It would be nice to think that possible,

However I do not see it happening anytime soon, if at all. Certainly there will be decisions made on an individual by individual case, but it has been especially unpleasant in many cases. I for one have reduced my footprint here greatly as I know others have as well. My interest in the general election will most likely drop to below zero based upon the results of the next few weeks, hence a political board becomes less of interest.

[7wo7rees]

7. Buck up. We can be the best. All we have to do is

make it be so. See?

Let us all just make it so.

[Sherman A1]

14. No

I don't think so.

Life is simply far too short and there are many other sites on the web that provide me with what I need in news and alike. I will continue to post my Daily Holidays post in the Lounge for the foreseeable future and comment on things along the way as I choose, but beyond that probably just check the headlines from time to time.

Assuming HRC is the nominee, I will simply move on to other things that I find of interest both on and off the web as the election will no longer be one of them. I now barely watch anything news related on television as it has become all Trump all the time and I really don't think I need his face in my living room. There are lots of other things in life beyond this election cycle, politics and this board.

[7wo7rees]

15. All true. Wish you all the best. UmK?

Maybe the rest of us just hang around for the abuse and pain. 😠

[Katashi_itto]

23. Agree.

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Or planes down

there was some bedland in the house today

[7wo7rees]

126. Thanks for dropping in. Do you think DU will recover?

[nadinbrzezinski]

134. Nope

[Kittycat]

135. I don't think we're welcome anymore honestly

I miss the old days. The thinkers, the dreamers, visionaries, researchers, investigators, protestors - and sharing everything in between. most topics are railroaded by RW talking points these days, and I don't mean candidate discussions. People here are now Fighting against HC reform, environmental reform, labor, trade, war/intervention, etc. pick a topic. Excusing away the god damn Iraq war. There's nothing Democratic about that. Sure we all had differences on topics, but the stuff I've had lobbed or read makes my skin crawl. It's hard to come back from that. I really dislike investing in a 'community' to see it crap out 2008 was bad, but not like this.

[7wo7rees]

136. Ok.and you are right. I believe this is harsh as ever in my

lifetime. I am 58.
Honestly, I just want to believe that humanity will prevail.

[Stryguy]

8. Joined in 2004

I think this election cycle is really no different than any other. People interested enough in politics to bother posting on a political website just don't have the tendency of "sticking to their guns and not voting if their candidate doesn't win the nomination". They fall in line.

Don't you remember Hillary vs Obama? That was ugly.

[Democat]

10. Clinton vs Obama was nothing like this

This site is overrun with right wing trolls trashing the Democratic party.

[Justitia]

16. I want to vomit reading all the new "rape" threads here today.

I've been here a long time and I've never seen shit like this.

I hardly participate anymore and this is what I open up to today

[Democat]

25. I'm not sure what happened to the admins in the last few months

Maybe they have lost interest.

[Egnever]

55. Sure it was

Almost exactly like this. It is almost a perfect recreation of the Obama Clinton Primary except this time it is Clinton in the lead calling on Sanders to drop out instead of her being on the other end in the last primary.

Hell there are still forums up and running for people still pissed off over Clintons loss to Obama. Many of them never stopped attacking him from the primaries onward looking for any excuse to criticize.

I am sure this time it will be no different except this time it looks like it will be Bernie supporters looking for every excuse to tear down Clinton.

How can you forget the whole PUMA thing? Party unity my ass....Sounds very similar to Bernie supporters this time around.

[Andy823]

63. +1,000,000 nt

[7wo7rees]

11. Interesting perspective.

Last edited Thu May 19, 2016, 11:58 PM - Edit history (1)

I had the privilege of being at a political event in late summer of 2006 in Dallas when Joe Biden and Harry Reid came to town and they brought with them this new guy, Barack Obama. Stunning in late summer, Dallas,, Tx, Lee Park. Then it all became clear. He had been chosen.

[maxsolomon]

84. for a very good reason

he was inspirational and charismatic. he could win.

[Democat]

9. People will be banned for defending both Democrats

If you defend both Sanders and Clinton, and call out right wing trolls, you'll eventually be banned.

This site is anti-Democrat right now.

The admins could fix it, but they refuse to do what is needed.

Not sure why they don't care.

[7wo7rees]

12. Oh for f's sake! Really?

[Democat]

13. By their inactivity, the admins are encouraging attacks on Democrats

There are many DUers openly agreeing with Donald Trump - supporting his slurs and lies - to attack one of the two Democratic candidates.

That type of behavior should be limited to the Primaries forum. Allowing it to take over the site, as it has in the last few months, makes this site hard to visit.

The admins could easily fix the problem through policy, but they choose not to.

[Cryptoad]

17. + gazillion!

[Feeling the Bern]

19. I've have posts hidden for calling out NRA talking points here and by word police

I lurked here for a long time before joining. About four years to get my news since this place has good LBN.

This was my news website in LBN.

DU has swing way to the right this election season.

[Joe Chi Minh]

33. This was bound to be affected by your police state, like

every other social venue.

Even in its heyday, DU had to accept contributions from manifest Republican trolls - nor could you call them out specifically as trolls. The name of the board, itself, now invites a degree of satire, but we need to be realistic, and it's still too valuable a resource to prejudice.

[Capt. Obvious]

64. This is the second post where you've claimed that admins could easily fix the problem

yet you've kept mum on this super easy fix.

[Egnever]

121. Well they do have something planned.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910315

Allow me to be perfectly clear: The current system of moderating here on DU is done. It completely failed, and I take full responsibility for that. Yes, we are still using it, but we have already signed its death warrant. We have a completely new system and we are going to insist on some standards.

The only reason we haven't unveiled the new system yet is because the primaries are the worst possible time to make a change like that -- the people who don't like the new system (and there will be plenty of them) would frame their opposition as a partisan act in support of their favored candidate, and all the rabid partisans on their side would believe it. People on both sides are so polarized and so primed to believe any story that puffs up their candidate and tears down the other that it would be impossible to make any serious change and make it stick.

[cwydro]

36. What nonsense.

Both EarlG and Skinner are active in banning trolls, as is MIRT.

[Democat]

50. Checked the LBN forum lately?

Half of the threads are trashing either Clinton or Sanders.

The admins could stop that today if they wanted to.

[cwydro]

57. And they've said they're going to let this primary nonsense run its course.

I expect them to crack down pdq when all is said and done.

Right now they'd just be playing whack-a-mole.

[Rex]

152. I've been defending both and so far I only have one hide.

That has nothing to do with HRC or BS. I also call out RWing trolls...so...

[sibelian]

18. Better to form new connections elsewhere. All good things come to an end.

Perhaps human communities aren't really possible online.

[sibelian]

148. Very sad.... and very true.

I've lost count of the number of times I've butted heads with 'em. That'll teach me...

[Cassiopeia]

20. I think a Republican potus is the only thing that can make that happen.

You may just get your wish if Hillary takes this primary.

[Blue_In_AK]

159. I agree with that.

We were pretty unified during the Bush years. I joined in November 2004 and it was fairly pleasant around here until the 2008 primary. I've heard that the 2004 primary was fairly contentious, too, but I wasn't here then.

[Cryptoad]

21. Time has come!

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/18/sorry_bernie_i_love_you_but_this_is_over_and_getting_embarrassing/

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

http://wonkette.com/601971/nice-grandpa-bernie-sanders-gonna-burn-your-sht-dowwwwwn#hUp4GMwA2jCdAXr0.01

[Warren DeMontague]

30. Yes, that's the way to do it.

derp.

[Cryptoad]

40. I guess if u are in right click

u can make personal attacks and name calling at will. And the admins sit around wondering why so many are leaving DU...........

[Warren DeMontague]

75. that doesn't even make any sense.

that's not a personal attack, either. What you said literally doesn't make any sense.

[Cryptoad]

89. Its no difference than me calling u a Babbling Idiot cause

I could understand what u said.......I've seen post hidden for far less (if u are in the right click)`````U know what I said was the truth.

[Warren DeMontague]

92. Go ahead and call me a babbling idiot, I don't care.

I do not live or die based upon others' opinion of me. Don't give terribly much of a shit, to be honest. I figured that out a long, long time ago.

The word you are searching for, however, is "clique". "right click" is what people do with their computer mouse, so excuse me if I found what you were saying confusing.

I'm not in any clique, or click for that matter, but thanks for playing.

[opiate69]

103. You're not in any clique??? But, I've already made our sign, dang-it!

Well, shit.. I guess I'll go hang with these guys then... if they'll let me

[Warren DeMontague]

104. Any club that would have me, as they say

I wouldnt want to be associated with anything whose standards were that low.

[opiate69]

105. Heh... indeed!

[cheapdate]

130. Exactly.

The opinion of random strangers might be interesting, or boring, or asinine. It might make me think, or it might make me smile, or it might make me yawn. But it will never make me angry. Why should it? Who gives a shit? Certainly not me. I came here for an argument.

[Cryptoad]

146. Hah,,,, I wrote my post just as intended,,,,

"click" ,,,, and u still dont get it.... I said nothing about whether u would care or not if I called u a babbling idiot. geeez. u are in click!

[Warren DeMontague]

149. yokay.

roger wilco, chief.

[LiberalArkie]

155. I wondered where my hat went.

[Warren DeMontague]

157. And I've been wondering where my bike helmet, par30 bulbs, mini disco balls & stainless steel wisks

Went.

Eddie, did you take them to burning man again? Fuck!

[Quantess]

139. That's a PERFECT way to extend friendly greetings and spread warmth to all DUers!

Your sense of timing is impeccable.

[pampango]

22. The 'Trump disease' of using vitriol rather than talking policy is apparently contagious.

Donald's attacks on other republicans seem similar to our attacks on each other - not so much policy differences as name-calling.

[AngryOldDem]

24. Look at Internet discourse in general, discussion sites in particular.

Most are unreadable. Why should DU be immune? It's sad, but a whole new generation of Keyboard Kommandos has arisen since DU started. Although it definitely isn't the same, DU is still pretty much above other sites I read, FWIW.

[liberal N proud]

28. Why does DU have to be like the rest of the internet

We were and are better than that! The rest of the internet has had decisive discussion boards for a long time DU was above that.

[AngryOldDem]

34. DU doesn't have to be.

But at times I see it being no better than most other sites out there. It isn't like it was when I joined back in 2004 -- maybe that's because of all the moderation changes that have happened over the years. Bottom line, the users decide what kind of site it's going to be, and I think the OP is wondering where we go after the election. This season has been particularly bad.

[liberal N proud]

26. I recall that at one time, you needed to be able to back up what you posted with evidence

If you didn't have a link to a reputable source to back up what you posted, you would be nailed for it.

And personal attacks were dealt with harshly as well.

[AgadorSparticus]

107. I think having to back up your assertions is key. You're right, back then that's what was the

Cultural norm here on DU. That was expected. And because of that, it elevated discussions and moderated the snark and bullshit. We seem to have lost that filter now.

[Orrex]

27. You used to be able to buy a loaf of bread with a nickel

Oh, the good old days.

[Brother Buzz]

47. But back then it was an eight-cent nickel...

so the smart ones would buy a three-cent newspaper first and get the same nickel back in change, then buy the bread.

[brush]

52. Explain, pls. When were nickels worth eight cents?

[Brother Buzz]

54. Google Captain Spaulding seven-cent nickel

[My Good Babushka]

58. You've left out a Hungerdunger. You left out the main one, too.

The best Marx Brothers' quote for this election would have to be:

How happy I could be with either of these two, if both of them just went away.

[Brother Buzz]

65. But Professor Wagstaff did give the Republicans their anthem

[frylock]

69. I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time

[pinboy3niner]

74. I knew you'd chime in here, you batard!

[TheFarseer]

31. The democratic party isn't what it used to be either.

Some people don't see a problem and some are mad as hell.

[AngryOldDem]

35. This is it in a nutshell.

[Hydra]

32. I don't think DU is ever capable of being what we thought it was again

Because the worst fears of some during the Bush Admin were revealed to be so- the opposition by the Dem Establishment to said Bush Admin's actions were purely political, not principles based.

The truth is that our party is now splitting- populism vs the neos. DU will not be the same after the convention, regardless of who wins, and may not even survive.

I'm proud of the people here who fought the good fight against the various illegalities of our gov't...but many of them are gone now, and there is an open push to get rid of the rest, just as in our party.

Smile! I'm sure Poppy Bush is doing the same.

[TheFarseer]

48. Your first paragraph - damn stright

It was always a weird idea that we're against the war, but most of us voted for it. It's not much different than the republicans are for whatever military action you've got, but Obama " didn't do it right" it was really sad seeing so many dems going along with Bush just so they could pretend to be tough and then trying to smack Bush over the head with the war when it became unpopular. Of course there was a large minority that didn't support it for one second.

[7wo7rees]

125. Thanks for weighing in. Miss you.

[Hydra]

145. Thank you!

I'm still "here" as much as I can be, but I see the door closing on what made this site great in the first place- the "underground" part. The news about what is really going on in our gov't and world, and the feeling that we could fix it if we worked together.

[Blue_Tires]

37. co-signed...

[sendero]

38. The fracture on this site is...

.... (IMHO) a result of Democratic politicians turning into moderate Republicans while pretending they were not.

This led to a schism between people who think that "better than a Republican" is good enough, and those who do not.

[Katashi_itto]

41. Well said

[DLevine]

44. Agreed. nt

[Albertoo]

93. By your standard, FDR and JFK would be 'moderate Republicans'

It's the Sanders fan base which is moving left from where the Democratic Party was,
not mainstream Democrats moving toward Republicans.

[jeff47]

94. FDR proposed single-payer healthcare.

Boy, how Republican.

[Albertoo]

96. I am for universal health care, but not single payer

Single payer gets abused, with the apparatus members siphoning off some of the universal care money to their own benefit, at the expense of the patients themselves (the health mana gets diverted more toward health care employees benefits than toward equipment and well being of patients)

A dual system, universal health care with a modicum of patient payment, is probably the equilibrium solution. And even conservatives can be drafted into that equilibrium solution, as demonstrated in most of Europe.

[jeff47]

99. I don't care.

Your implicit claim is that FDR and JFK are completely in-step with the conservative wing of the party.

This is not remotely true. I gave one example of how FDR proposed something that Clinton says will never, ever happen.

And when it became obvious how ludicrous your point was, you suddenly wanted to talk about how all government programs are massively corrupt. A lovely Reagan talking point.

A dual system, universal health care with a modicum of patient payment, is probably the equilibrium solution.

Nope. It gives you the worst of both worlds.

You get massively more expensive care because people delay treatment due to what you consider a "modicum of patient payment". Result is much higher costs and thus much higher taxes/premiums for worse outcomes.

As for your "even conservatives" line, you are forgetting that conservatives in Europe are to the left of conservative Democrats.

[Albertoo]

100. I was answering your post #94

So please refrain from claiming I wanted to switch topic because you would have made a remarkably valid point. Not the case either way.

And FDR or JFK were most certainly to the right of sanders, be it only because they were prgamatic individuals busy with making things happen in the real world, not demagogues firing up the young with ideals that they could never finance.

FDR even mentioned he was saving Capitalism. Can you imagine Chomsky or Sanders offering to save Capitalism? I think not.

As or a dual system giving the worst of both worlds, you obviously are not familiar with the economics of health care: the single payer card in France has been audited as being massively abused, while the non single payer system in ultra-capitalist Singapore offers one stop MD visit + medication for about $5. People do not "delay treatment due to what (I would) consider a "modicum of patient payment""

[liberal_at_heart]

109. excuse me? How is what Bernie is proposing more left than the New Deal?

JFK and RFK both fought for unions. FDR gave us the New Deal. All the New Democrats give us is excuses for why we must spend trillions on war but must compromise on cuts to social services during budget negotiations. Spend less on war, tax the rich and we will have plenty of money to expand SS, expand Medicare to all, and pay for college the same way we pay for K-12. How are those programs which we already have more left than the New Deal?

[Albertoo]

114. The difference between reformists and iseologues is the principle of reality

FDR said he was saving capitalism because it's the only system that works. FDR relied on Keynes (who was a wealthy capitalist academic) to engineer the New Deal based on a realistic road map. Not the same than a Sanders who makes promises which bipartisan think tanks have proved he can't fund. Firing up hopes that won't be fulfilled can easily end up in a downward spiral 'a la Chavez'. Which is why I'm convinced Sanders is trying to move the Democratic Party away from its historically reformist course toward socialist adventurism.

[liberal_at_heart]

115. And do you know who proves you and the think tanks wrong?

The people that fought and won the Labor Movement. The people that fought and won Civil Rights. The people that fought and won the Suffrage Movement. It can be done, has been done, and will be done again. I didn't see all this "we can't" attitude with the ACA and the Republicans have fought that just as hard.

[Albertoo]

116. That's just slogans. Fact is Sanders economic plan doesn't add up.

But bear with me: I am not saying it is impossible to reform more. I think it should be possible to reduce the income gap to finance universal health care, notably by repealing the GW tax cuts and putting pressure on tax havens. Again, I advocate gradual reformism.

But that's something different from two other things:
1- that Sanders is either not honest or not serious. What he promises cannot be met only with the increased revenues he mentions. S either he and his team can't count, or they're hiding some of the pain they would have to inflict to finance the promises and are not honest enough to live up to that
2- that beyond sound calculation, Sanders has a history of anticapitalist bent (see his cosying up with the Sandinista dreamers) which is not reassuring given that anticapitalism has a 100% track record of failing.

¡Social reformism, Siempre!
¡La revolucion, No!

[liberal_at_heart]

117. Sorry incrementalism has had its chance for over 30 years now and has failed.

[Albertoo]

118. Failed? How so?

People in the West (+ Asian democracies) are better off than anywhere else.
What we're facing now is the need to correct the income inequality which exploded in the early 90's and became very painful when the 2008 crisis hit. That's a need for reform, not revolution.

[liberal_at_heart]

119. Yeah, and the trade policies will continue to erode our wages until we are on par with

those other countries that we are currently doing better than. Things have been going to shit since Reagan and it is time to reverse course. The things Bernie is proposing is not that radical and the majority of America supports his ideas. We already have Medicare. We already have tuition free K-12. We already have Social Security. What is so radical about expanding what we already have? How do we pay for it? We don't spend trillions of dollars on war, we tax the rich and we raise the minimum wage to a living wage so average Americans have money to spend and save. We stop cutting social services and we invest in our future.

[Albertoo]

124. You forgot something in your picture: the world

It's a mistake to think the income gap grew only because of Reagan. It's not true.
At least in the beginning of his term, Reagan was rather middle of the road, bringing tax rates to historical mean levels (his first term was sensible).
What really started gnawing at blue collar employment and wages at the same time was the opening of China in 1979. Even with low wages, jobs before were never exported say to Africa because the work force and rule of law are less reliable there. China was a game changer. Since, you've had India following up with its call centers as many Indians speak English. The insane GW tax cuts were only the icing on the cake.

[liberal_at_heart]

127. His first term was sensible? Wow. We obviously have very different ideas about

Reagan's presidency. It's late and I'm done arguing. I will politely agree to disagree and go to bed for the evening.

[Albertoo]

128. Sleep well

[Katashi_itto]

141. +10000 the person your dealing with loves revisonism.

[Albertoo]

166. What a strange statement

[cheapdate]

131. +1

[Hortensis]

162. Thanks for your contributions to understanding,

Albertoo.

I recommend those inclined to disagree perhaps just re-read thoughtfully and consider whether there could be any truth to any part of this. Albertoo has done his homework on these issues.

Seems to me I haven't noticed as many "evil capitalism" posts on DU lately. If it's actually the case, perhaps Bernie could be back-pedaling on that during the campaign?

But I agree the personal profit motive is far too important an economic driver to make doing away with it, instead of just strictly controlling it, a functional course. That said, I find villifying capitalism, as if it were all bad and needed to be destroyed, as highly suspicious and questionable as villification and villifiers always are.

¡Social reformism, Siempre!
¡La revolucion, No!

[Albertoo]

167. ;)

¡Social reformism, Siempre!
¡La revolucion, No!

[Jim Beard]

106. I think we as Democrats saw the republicans were able to stick together

and get their way while the Democrats were not able to do anything. Much too splintered. Too many Blue Dogs. I got into it with my Blue Dog Democrat back a fews years ago and his response by the way he said sent shivers down my back. They have power and will use it. His Name is Charlie Stenholm.

[Odin2005]

39. This site started going downhill after the 2010 election.

I think the fallout from that election created an irreparable rift between us Progressives and more moderate posters who wrongly blamed us for low Democratic turnout.

[Javaman]

46. +1 nt

[nemo137]

66. That's when I left for a while.

Although I saw the divide somewhat differently than you did.

[Rex]

42. People kept shitting where everyone sleeps, so eventually folks went and made their own homes.

Now it seems they don't want to come back to DU and play nice. They like their new homes with walls that echo for days.

[TransitJohn]

43. To me, I view it sort of how I view the PPACA

Skinner et. al., have the website that they want, just like the Administration got the health insurance bill they wanted.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

45. i still stop by to read the talking points from msm

Still a few good people here yes, but the underground part left years ago. Looks like soon it will be all hillbots soon and i can stop bothering to visit any longer. Complete waste of the awesome forum software the guys built when the content just drives people away.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

83. Some of us old-timers hope you'll keep coming here

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

[7wo7rees]

122. Thank you. nt

[GOLGO 13]

49. Frankly, I'm having a blast with all the tomfoolery & hair on fire hysteria.

The whining is like a sweet, sweet serenade to me now.

[Maedhros]

53. This post right here is a classic example of why people are leaving DU in droves.

No content, no insight, nothing to say, just snark. Freeper-like.

/ignore list.

[BillZBubb]

77. Well, that and getting alert stalked!

[mrdmk]

138. Yep, 1st class snark with nothing but a smug attitude

Be good, just added that poster above to my ignore list...

[villager]

51. It's become a place of farcical, mostly rightwing "jabs," posted in lieu of "discussion"

Sad indeed, compared to how interesting it used to be....

[My Good Babushka]

56. It seems the same to me

Of course I mostly come in to argue with people when there's no one at home to argue with. DU is always very obliging with arguments!

[cheapdate]

129. With you!

[tularetom]

59. America is but a shadow of what it used to be

Why should DU be any different?

[TipTok]

60. Should have had better candidates...

This is all self inflicted..

[TacoD]

61. DU will "come together and be the community it used to be" when there is a Republican president.

Sad but true.

[HuckleB]

62. Those who are left, no longer care.

Perspective is gone.

Still, this is what the Internet as a whole has begotten.

[frylock]

67. The veil was lifted in 2009 when it became obvious that the only thing many of us had in common..

was a shared hatred of Bushco. Apparently, conservative policy is perfectly acceptable if applied by a Democratic administration.

[nc4bo]

70. +1000! nt

[HuckleB]

72. Derp.

[frylock]

73. Insightful analysis.

[HuckleB]

80. Just as insightful as your meaningless response.

Hmm.

[frylock]

82. Once again.

[HuckleB]

102. I'm glad you can clap.

[frylock]

110. You're phoning it in.

Surely, you can do better than this. This is just fucking sad.

[jeff47]

95. And this post is a perfect example of why there will be no "coming back together". (nt)

[HuckleB]

101. Derp.

DU culture chose hyperbole over evidence. That's when things entire haywire, as they always will under such circumstances.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

137. This is a great example of how far the site has fallen when "derp" is the most you can

contribute. I didn't join the site to huff glue and go back to the mental state of a second grader, but this monosyllabic idiocy makes me feel like that's what's happened here. No thanks.

[HuckleB]

140. Irony.

[Warren DeMontague]

78. Yeah, exactly. Some of it was sort of inevitable.

I mean, dialing back to when this place started, or when I got on board (2004)... even though there were rifts, like you said, we all had a common battle we were fighting.

Hell, I have someone in my extended family who is a Ron Paul, Alex Jones, gun nut. But I can remember back around 2006 or so I originally had thought we were in agreement on politics, because all I knew about the guy at the time was that he couldn't stand Dubya.

[HuckleB]

85. It's harder to be in charge, no question about it.

And discussion at DU was dying before that. I admit my part in it. I used to spend a great deal of time thinking through responses, and I gave up after having too much of my time wasted by lazy posters. It's a hit and run place now, like most of the rest of the Internet. Oddly, I've found some great groups on Facebook, of all places, where real discussions still happen, and where people challenge each other constructively and honestly. I wish it could be like that on this scale, but I don't think it can.

[Bonobo]

97. THAT is the unvarnished truth. nt

[m-lekktor]

111. I am sure the reason many on DU were against the Iraq war was because Bush wasn't a Democrat. nt

[frylock]

112. I'm convinced of that as well.

[Aristus]

71. I'm not going anywhere.

And in September, I'll celebrate being a DU-er for fifteen years. I miss a lot of the old-timers. But this is still my favorite place to hang out.

[The_Casual_Observer]

76. 2008 was just as bad. The best days were back in the early 2000's

[hunter]

81. If you think something is missing, why not post it yourself?

The only time I self-censor myself on DU is when I recognize I'm being mean, or occasionally when I'm being too cynical and snarky, but there is so much stuff in U.S. politics to be cynical about!

I don't venture into GD: P at all, and usually excuse myself when I'm called to jury duty there. This nonsense will pass. Anyone who would vote for Trump, and anyone who would sit out the election rather than voting for the Democratic candidates, simply shouldn't be here.

As a left wing radical environmentalist, pacifist, and automobile hating Luddite I don't expect I'll ever have a home in mainstream U.S. politics, but it's pretty easy to see who I DON'T WANT as President, limited as we are by our two party system.

[cheapdate]

132. +1

If I never had to drive a car or walk on concrete again I'd be very happy.

[MerryBlooms]

86. The rancid state of certain forums and groups on DU is directly related to this guy-

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Unfortunately, that guy has had full run of DU for a long time. Day 1 in the Meta forum. The masks slipped, the gloves came off... venom spewed and clans were formed. Meta forum was scrapped in an attempt to quiet the nastiness, but the guy now has clans, and they've had full freedom to poison every well of their choice on DU, and have done an outstanding job.

Little or no punishment for the members who harass and stalk through DU mail... that responsibility is on the victims of the abuse- you're supposed to block and ignore. Meanwhile, the abusers (even the ones on time-out) are/were allowed to go about their merry way and send nasty messages over and over, the recipients left with little or no recourse.

The DU you fondly recall is forever gone. Both in terms of the members, civility and guidelines.

I don't blame the administrators. They designed a site that relied on the goodness and fairness of the DU community. The admins put too much faith in the DU community. The hideous goings on that some of us recoil in disgust when reading, is the true DU. You can read in ATA the blaming of the admins for the acts/posts of the DU community... many conveniently dismissing their own behavior as partly responsible for the ugliness. The DU community as a whole, failed and let the administrators down, not the other-way-around.

("the guy" is inclusive- all members of DU)

[MrScorpio]

87. I've been here all this time. nt

[AgadorSparticus]

88. I so agree. There is just too much snark, arrogance, and vitriol.

It doesn't leave much room for discussion like before. We talk about the hate language from the right wing nuts, but reading the posts here on DU sure gives them a run for their money.

[fleabiscuit]

108. Yup. n/t

[GaYellowDawg]

90. So who's going to Make DU Great Again?

I think a large part of the unity from "way back then" came from uniting against one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. We all had one thing to rally around, and it was that we all hated what W and Darth Cheney were doing to the country.

[Katashi_itto]

142. The hillbots. After all the plan is to make just this another echo chamber.

They will succeed.

[Democat]

163. "Hillbots" should be a hide if not ban

The site would be better off without trolls attacking Democrats using phrases like "Hill Bots" and "Bernie Bros".

[Katashi_itto]

165. Ah the irony, it burns....

[redwitch]

171. Trump?

[SCantiGOP]

91. I think we all have the same goals

We just have wildly different long and short term strategies.

[libodem]

98. All things change

And pass away.

The Buddha

[KT2000]

113. I miss the humor

the ugly shoe thread was a classic!

[southerncrone]

120. The direction of DU has not been a positive one, nor a progressive one.

Can't spend much time here anymore cuz people are so nasty most of the time. I remember when we had thoughtful, respectful discussions, not verbal attacks. Just like the party as a whole, we have more & more semi-Republicans here. From my point of view, it's a real loss. Trolls, maybe, maybe not. Either way, I won't be engaging much.

[7wo7rees]

133. Understand. And understood. Is there any damned way to

move forward in a positive way?

[southerncrone]

160. I suppose personal attack-rants could be locked out for starters.

We have this "jury" system in place. Perhaps using it to tombstone those who attack others? Might work as a deterrent-just a thought.
Also, if our members would simply act like adults, instead of 3rd graders on the playground, that would certainly help. I suppose it's a reflection of our society, as a whole--self-centered & on constant attack mode. Or maybe the result of so many people on psych meds these days. Seriously, I'm not kidding about that.

[raccoon]

143. DU was better when W was in office. I don't know of anything else that was. nt

[Act_of_Reparation]

144. It was inevitable.

Subcultures where social status is determined by one's perceived authenticity inherently self-radicalize. Over a long enough timeline, the culture fragments as those with the most status fight over who is most devoted to the premise of the group. Everywhere you look, people are "trolls", or they're "bought", or they're "freepers". The accusations all imply inauthenticity as a means to discredit. That's not an accident.

On the bright side, it took the first wave of punk rock only a few years to implode under the weight of its own standards of authenticity. DU has made it much longer.

[Democat]

164. There are plenty of real trolls here

It's not meant to discredit, it's the truth.

Look at the people using anti-Democratic party terms like "Shillary" and "Bernie Bros". They are trolling.

[Act_of_Reparation]

168. "Troll" is a term so overused around here it has lost all connection to its intended meaning.

Last edited Mon May 23, 2016, 08:15 AM - Edit history (1)

A troll has one motivation: make people angry. They don't run around promoting an ethos or an ideology or taking sides in primaries. By and large, I've kept my nose out of this insipid primary debate, but I'd wager dollars to donuts the sweeping majority of those people throwing those terms around really do subscribe to their respective candidates of choice.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

147. DU now features a small contingent of posters

who act like AM radio or cable TV conservative talking heads. They won't document their claims, preferring instead to repeat a thing enough times that they can then claim it's just true (anyone know any stories about chairs?). They'll change the subject on you rather than addressing the point that's been made, they'll talk over you, insofar as possible in a text-based medium. And they lie. That's the biggest one to me--when people are willing to like directly and repeatedly to your face.

I could get this in Yahoo comments sections, or in the Fresno Bee's comments section. The Reddit politics sub is more mature than DU is these days, and that's a shame. This is a prescription for the death of a once-great website.

[HOPNOSH]

154. Indeed!!

I agree. Once I heard this joke about Falcon Air this cheap airline, have you ever heard the joke? Too long to post here.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

158. I know that one--the one that ends with the Omani Air Force shooting the plane down.

One of my favorites.

[pintobean]

170. People should read

the hidden posts listed on your transparency page for perspective.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=106893&sub=trans

[DisgustipatedinCA]

172. DU now features a small contingent of posters.

who act like AM radio or cable TV conservative talking heads. They won't document their claims, preferring instead to repeat a thing enough times that they can then claim it's just true (anyone know any stories about chairs?). They'll change the subject on you rather than addressing the point that's been made, they'll talk over you, insofar as possible in a text-based medium. And they lie. That's the biggest one to me--when people are willing to like directly and repeatedly to your face.

[pintobean]

173. And a large contingent of jerks

but that's always been the case.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

174. Sure, but what does that have to do with my post about lying and AM radio tactics?

You have something you want to say. Do so. If you wish to draw a corollary between what I posted and what kind of poster I am, do it.

[KamaAina]

150. Still beats the hell out of Frei Republik.

[RKP5637]

153. I don't see much 'underground' about DU anymore. A lot of posters

have left. I guess I'm complaining, not supposed to do that, but these are just observations. Also, there's way too much snark... We should be bonding together, not cutting each other up. Way back Bush was the common enemy, now it seems to be DU fractions. OK, I'll stop here.

[Depaysement]

156. Many great people passed on

From Andy Stephenson to xchrom and beyond.

R.I.P.

[louis c]

161. I Couldn't Agree More

I am a 12 year member of Democratic Underground.

That's Democratic Underground, not "Independent Underground" or "Socialist Underground".

We may differ on ideas, but in the end, I thought we were supposed work toward advancing the cause of Democrats.

In 2008, I was a Hillary supporter. The minute Obama was the Democratic candidate, I worked just as hard for him,

I guess that's the difference between being a 40 year Democrat and just using the party as a vessel for your own ideology.

I post here much less frequently because of the vitriol from people who think this forum is something other than what I thought it was when I joined in 2004.

If this site turns out to be working to undermine the Presidential candidate of the Democratic party, either intentionally, or through a lack of control, I, too, will depart.

[Skittles]

169. anyone who is 100% behind any politician is a fucking IDIOT

there are a LOT OF IDIOTS here