HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » LGBT (Group) » Just had the pleasure of ...

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:41 AM

 

Just had the pleasure of serving on a jury

on an alert on a pro-gay response.

The post in question: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3732262

I voted to leave it, stating that the post in question was in no way an attack on the poster it was a reply to, and that far too often bigoted members of DU hold sway on juries when an anti-gay member alerts on anything even remotely pro-gay.

Will share the final results when they arrive. Maybe this time we will win the Russian Roulette of jury selection.

13 replies, 2227 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply Just had the pleasure of serving on a jury (Original post)
Pab Sungenis Sep 2013 OP
uppityperson Sep 2013 #1
Pab Sungenis Sep 2013 #4
uppityperson Sep 2013 #5
Warpy Sep 2013 #8
Pab Sungenis Sep 2013 #2
DonCoquixote Sep 2013 #12
Jackpine Radical Sep 2013 #3
Zorra Sep 2013 #9
tridim Sep 2013 #6
NYC_SKP Sep 2013 #7
tridim Sep 2013 #10
pinto Sep 2013 #11
NYC_SKP Sep 2013 #13

Response to Pab Sungenis (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:46 AM

1. Why would that be alerted on? Reading down the replies, I see who probably did but in no way was it

a personal attack on the poster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uppityperson (Reply #1)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:48 AM

4. Because some people on DU don't like gays

 

and will alert on anything even remotely pro-gay, and vote to hide anything even remotely pro-gay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:49 AM

5. I know, I guess it was more of a rhetorical question and support of you.

I do not understand people a lot of the time (not meaning you).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 12:05 PM

8. Pro gay or anti Catholic

You can kind of take your pick with this particular post.

Most Catholics are sensible people who disagree with Rome on many issues, LGBT issues being one of them. They still don't like to see Rome criticized in any way and that might have been the reason for the alert, too.

I think it's likely a toss up between the two groups.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:46 AM

2. We won this one.

 

At Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:35 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

You are promoting an anti gay bigot as if he was for equality and decency. That's not cool.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3732262

REASON FOR ALERT:

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Accusing the OP of "attacking" LGBT people, just because the OP dared to express the heretical idea that Pope Francis might be an improvement over the previous pope. This is really nasty. Please, let's make DU a friendlier place.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:42 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't see this as a personal attack. Borderline, maybe, but not enough to hide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This is a tough one. The alerter has a valid point that this post accuses the poster od supporting anti-gay positions, when htat is not the case. However, rather than censoring this post, discussing it is a better option (which is being done).

Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The "offending" post is perhaps an extreme statement of opinion, and indeed an opinion I disagree with, but the proper remedy is discussion, not suppression, of the opinion.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: Much as I dislike the Church, and the fact that the Pope doesn't do much much more, this attack on the poster was uncalled for.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: A bit hyperbolic, but not over the line. Reads like rigorous political discourse rather than a personal attack.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I agree with Laelth that Francis is a big improvement over Benedict, but I am not going to vote to hide someone who speaks up for LGBT people. This is not an attack on the poster in any way, and far too often bigoted DU'ers hold sway over the juries when anti-gay members alert on anything even remotely pro-gay. I will not join in that trend.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #2)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 02:28 PM

12. as someone who serves on juries a lot

I am surprised this even got alerted on. I have alerted on OPs that insulted people, called for people to get killed, called them more cuss words then George Carlin and Tupac Shakur could think of, only to see the inevitable "leave them alone", often by people who broke the terms of service right in the very explanation for their decision. Seeing the good guys win this battle is almost like a trip to Bizarro world, dave that in this Bizarro world, things actually work like they should.

Bravo on defending the right to criticize Pope Frank, who is following the Barack Obama/Hillary Clinton school of "if I make the bigots comfortable, maybe they will act nicer" school of thought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:47 AM

3. I was on that jury too (& voted with the 5-1 majority).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 12:17 PM

9. ...

I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:50 AM

6. The new jury system is going to be a nightmare.

People who are here to disrupt now have a tool to completely silence rational voices for a LONG time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tridim (Reply #6)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 12:01 PM

7. That was my first thought, too. There are tiny tribes of alerters...

 

Who prey on certain members they dislike and/or people who are passionate about one issue or another.

I don't like that they can now have as much power as they are being given.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #7)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 12:19 PM

10. There needs to be a rule against alert abuse.

Which IMO is much more of a serious issue than posts being hidden.

What's to stop disruptors from alerting on every post from a DU'er they don't like? Eventually they will get their six hidden posts, just based on quantity, at which point that DU'er is 100% silenced for 90 days. it's the ultimate personal attack, and apparently not at all a violation of the DU rules.

That's just wrong, and it makes me want to leave DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #7)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 01:20 PM

11. Skinner commented on the alert issue in an ATA response -

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinto (Reply #11)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 02:29 PM

13. I hadn't seen that Q and A.

 

But it's encouraging!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread