With no time-outs, I see posters with MANY hides are now going completely hog-wild.

[Bonobo]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by In_The_Wind (a host of the 2016 Postmortem forum).

I assume this will be locked as Meta, but I had to at least try to get this out there.

Several posters are absolutely being unrestrained in their rhetoric since they can now get 6, 7, 8,9 any number of hides without going on time-out.

This is not right. Some of us are doing our best to still remain within reasonable boundaries of behavior.

Something should be done. We should all share our opinions with the Admins who gave amnesty with all the best intentions.

Some people are taking complete advantage of that gesture.

[Fumesucker]

1. The only thing Skinner is hurting with this is the remaining shards of DU credibility

I come here for the laughs and these idiots make me laugh my ass off.

[JonLeibowitz]

4. One cosmic poster never fails!

[cui bono]

20. As does the brave one who think they have a nak... er... knack for words.

And then there are the lesser known who are so far over the edge.

Hey, skinner invited the tea party wing of DU to be themselves and now we get to see what that is. In case we missed seeing it in the Clinton Cave screenshots.

At this point DU is just a bad habit I haven't broken yet.

.

[Betty Karlson]

34. Ouch: those words could hurt and should shame certain DU-ers.

[closeupready]

78. Oh yeah. Been that way for years.

[liberal_at_heart]

6. +1000000

[villager]

18. There are remaining shards?

[Fumesucker]

61. It depends how far down the rabbit hole you want to game it

These folks certainly aren't making their supposed candidate look all that great, people aren't that dim witted and the way there are diametrically opposed attacks (Bernie is a poor money manager/has millions hidden in Israel) makes the attackers look like maroons.

[roguevalley]

22. I wrote to skinner about outed rapists on a rape thread and I'm

still waiting for an answer. Oh and the rapists weren't banned.

[TM99]

2. IBTL

You might also notice that said posters are predominantly Clinton supporters.

Sanders supporters that even get two or three in rapid succession are going on to 'Review' status which is for all intents and purposes, a time out until Admin resolves it.

[liberal_at_heart]

5. You are not the only one noticing that.

[Bjornsdotter]

7. Yeah

....hard not to notice.

[JimDandy]

9. So none of the posters on the admin's team go on 'Review' status?

[TM99]

13. Sure doesn't like that way.

Find me one and I will be flabbergasted!

[bvf]

30. Yep. Hard to miss that. n/t

[AgingAmerican]

3. And they all happen to be Hillary supporters

Some of them are being very, very ugly and personal against Sanders supporters, like this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1668430

I know the management here is pro Hillary. They are allowing things to go full ugly, apparently. Watch the Hillary campaign go really vicious against Sanders now.

[Dragonfli]

14. Wow, 11 hides!! Seriously? /nt

[AgingAmerican]

15. Some have 15 and more

[PufPuf23]

32. I have seen as many as 17. eom

[TM99]

16. The poster has 11 fucking hides

and is not on review.

Yup, no bias here folks. Move along, nothing to see here! Sweet Jesus!

[joshcryer]

26. I think that's a glitch.

So many hides in a short period of time will get you automatically flagged for review.

[joshcryer]

51. Flagged for review

So much for bias.

[Marr]

17. Yeah, odd how they're all Hillary supporters. /nt

[Betty Karlson]

35. Bias: destroying good relations since the dawn of time. eom

[joshcryer]

21. I expect they'll be flagged for review soon.

Or there's a glitch in the software. 3 hides in one day got bravenak flagged (even though they were 100% justified comments, and even the other comments she made were wrongly hidden).

[riderinthestorm]

48. Oh FFS, she was threatening physical violence on the one hide (6-1)

The other 2 hides were 5-2 so not even close calls.

We can all read her transparency page you know....

[joshcryer]

50. Against someone who joined specifically to harass her, banned by MIRT.

Please.

She got baited, those hides might've been warranted if it wasn't someone off site signing up specifically to pick on her. Should be expunged, really. And the review kicked in immediately. So there must be a glitch for that other poster.

Just checked, that other poster is Flagged for review as I suspected they would be. But those were warranted.

[riderinthestorm]

52. That one was in her last spree, the one you're referring to happened in her non-apology thread

Again, we can all see this.

And she's up to 12 hides.

[joshcryer]

53. The harassment campaign worked.

Look at her transparency page before the harassment posts, she most of her hides were nothing, then pow, she gets hit over and over again. It's sad.

[riderinthestorm]

55. Lol, "poor bravenak"...is that the current schtick?

[joshcryer]

58. I wonder if OP would agree?

Oh, that's right, he replied positively to her calling out one of those MIRT bans before she got one of her own posts hidden.

[Bonobo]

59. I try as hard as I possibly can to support Bravenak.

She does not always make it easy, but I think it has helped me become a better person --or at least exercised my patience muscle.

[riderinthestorm]

64. I'd happily see the hide taken off - her response to the troll.

That would still leave 11 hides...

Look, bravenak has admitted herself she's trolling so honestly I'm not too concerned.

Now that it's been discovered she's actually an anti-Semite, her nasty attacks against a Jewish candidate make some kind of sense but it hasn't exactly endeared her to folks here (and at DKos).

[joshcryer]

66. So much for apologies, right?

Indeed, that's when the new found harassment campaign began.

[GReedDiamond]

8. "Something should be done"...

...I have put dozens of "DUers" on "full ignore," which I have never done before (with one or two notable exceptions - which I eventually reversed) and all I can say is, having done so has made it possible for me to remain here without elevated blood pressure issues.

Not sure what else can be done, given the apparent loyalties of the site owner.

[roguevalley]

23. I trashed the whole HRC group.

[desmiller]

29. I'd "naughty-listed" the holy shit out of them, and I'm still hungry for more.

I have so many on my list that it should be census worthy.

[smiley]

43. Before this primary season I had one person on ignore.

I now have over 120 at last counting. Some usernames seem to reappear even after I've put them on ignore. It's very strange.

[TheFarS1de]

10. I love how they complain about the hides

When they are the ones who had to have posted something offensive enough to warrant a hide . I guess some people just like to blame others for their faults , but one group does seem rather heavy in the amount of bans .

Is there a cut off based on hides or is it a free for all in here ?

[Barack_America]

11. That 9-hide poster who just attacked you is now 10.

You're welcome.

But yes, this site is now in the toilet again, just like 2008.

Thanks, Hillary.

[leftynyc]

44. WTF does Hillary have to do

with bad behavior from her supporters (for the record, I have ZERO hides since the new rules)? If that's the metric we're using, I wouldn't be able to vote for Bernie in the general if he managed to win the nomination because I find many of his supporters here (and elsewhere) so vile.

[Major Hogwash]

12. Skinner will henceforth be known as Mule Skinner!!

For all the "hides" he has collected along the way.



They probably won't post here after June 7th, anyway, so there are just 2 more months of this crap.

[Betty Karlson]

36. Yes, paid contributors are not regular posters, in my experience.

Besides, what would they post if it weren't for the daily inspiration from David Brock's marching orders?

[madokie]

19. As I come to them

I click on the box with the red X and fully ignore them. I'm not here to read shit I'm hear to learn

[delrem]

24. Skinner knew what he was doing.

He wanted pure BrockPAC hell.

[synergie]

25. Honest people who look at those hides can see that "reasonable boundaries of behavior"

were not in play when they were given by stacked juries for the purpose of silencing opposition. You're still being unrestrained in your rhetoric, you're just not able to silence anyone calling you out on it, and this seems to have disturbed your group.

Indeed something should be done, and when those who seem to still wish to abuse, stalk, swarm or otherwise harass those they were targeting before, they should be called out and held accountable.

Some people are just upset that they can no longer silence any opposition and must answer when called out for deliberate abuse, when the juries are not in their favor, regardless of the vileness or nastiness of the content of their posts.

[Fumesucker]

31. Odd how everyone's behavior became so examplary during the primaries

Many of the returned former time out posters had many hides and indeed time outs before the primaries began so in many cases their bad behavior predated the primary conflict.

[leftynyc]

45. +1000

So many were using alerts to silence people and now they're whining that they STILL are forced to see that not everybody agrees with them. Poor little babies.

[neverforget]

27. it makes the poo flinging more intense since there

are no consequences.

[JDPriestly]

28. Put ones that you can't stand to read on ignore.

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Some of these transpsarency pages make for great readin'

[progressoid]

37. Rarely a day goes by when I don't get called on for jury duty.

1-3 times a day. And I'm not online that much lately.

[hollysmom]

38. I know!! I get called at least twice a day

`and most of the comments are innocuous. but a flame thrower is trying to troll them out. drives me nuts - I have to keep adding a comment about growing up. I thought if you kept reporting people, and they got a pass, you would be out. but it seems not.

[libtodeath]

39. Since there is a financial link between the DU ownership and the Hillary camp it is not surprising.

[fun n serious]

40. Skinner is in the Tank with Hillary! LMAO

You can't be serious..

[RiverLover]

42. Actually, its true. /nt

[riderinthestorm]

47. Yes, paid staff as is his wife nt

[libtodeath]

56. The connection isnt hard to find.

[aikoaiko]

41. It's not a big , it's a feature.

What you observe as a problem is, I think, exactly what Skinner intended.

[riderinthestorm]

46. Yup, more controversy = more clicks = more $$ nt

[Motown_Johnny]

49. Clearly, rules don't matter to one group of posters here.

Funny how that group seems to support the candidate who could be indicted and also refuse to acknowledge that possibility.

[Yurovsky]

62. Rules are for thee...

not for moi...

It's been her modus operandi for over 40 years. People that support her are either oblivious or not really bothered by that. Ends/means justification. It's not unique to any one candidate, and I'd venture to guess a majority of politicians in both parties hold similar views to some extent.

But can't we do better?

[seabeyond]

76. Ya. The group that can have a Meta stay opened without being locked. I hear ya, Motown.

[Bonobo]

82. Alert on it. nt

[Sunlei]

54. Let them speak their minds, let it all hang out. They will not be on juries.

[Depaysement]

57. Hog Wild - DU version

[JoePhilly]

60. Meanwhile, you can say anything you want about Hillary, or her supporters, and be cheered for it.

Attack Hillary or her supporters in whatever manner you want, and not only will you not get a hide, you'll get 100+ recs.

Some people are taking advantage all right.

[Bonobo]

63. I've had a few time-outs this season.

What I resent is seeing Hillary supporters racking them up without any fear of a time out.

[JoePhilly]

65. I see and endless stream of sily hides against Hillary supporters.

btw ... you should feel free to "rack them up" too.

[Bonobo]

68. You "see"?

How is that? My transparency page is not visible.

But I will decline your offer to "rack 'em up".

I like to think I'm above that except when I am feeling really pissed.

[JoePhilly]

74. Everything isn't about you.

To be clear, I see lots of hidden posts by Hillary supporters where the thin skin of Bernie supporters on the Jury, is on obvious display.

Lots of tough talk ... and if it comes back around, ALERT!!!!

[Logical]

67. Whine much? Nt

[JoePhilly]

71. What exactly do you think the OP is doing?

You guys absolutely crack me up.

A bunch of saints being mistreated by the evil Hillary supporters.

Nasty OPs against Hillary running about 8 to 1, but Hillary supporters are the bad actors.

Its hilarious.

[seabeyond]

70. Here sits a Meta thread going hog wild insulting Clinton supporters. No locks, no hides. Ya, tell

us your story Bonobo.

Ooooops. Is this me daring to speak up?

[JoePhilly]

72. Yup ... poor persecuted Bernie supporters.

[seabeyond]

73. Right? Nt

[rjsquirrel]

75. Passive aggression

is a thing here.

So childish.

[seabeyond]

77. There is not a bit of passive in my aggressive, hence having many people tell me that I NEED

to be passive aggressive so I avoid hides. I simply see that as dishonest and cowardly. I hear ya.

[rjsquirrel]

79. No not you

I was referring to the general climate of trying to get away with slurs and smears by insinuation, on both sides but to my eye worse on the Bernie battlements.

[Bonobo]

80. I didn't say a single word about Hillary supporters. nt

[hrmjustin]

69. How many times outs have you been on?

For transparency I have been on 3 and the last one I deserved. The first two i disagree with but the juries did not.

My point in this is you are not one to talk considering your own history here.

[Bonobo]

81. Two and the point is that I DID my time. nt