first time poster on du spewing anti abortion shit, stands.

[seabeyond]

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: You alerted on a post which was already alerted

Mail Message
On Mon Sep 15, 2014, 01:32 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

This kind of thinking makes me SICK
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5540269

REASON FOR ALERT

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

YOUR COMMENTS

This is a anti choice disruptor and does not belong on DU. Mirt needs to oust the man.

JURY RESULTS

Someone else already alerted on this post before you alerted on it, and only the first alert was sent to a Jury. A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of the post on Mon Sep 15, 2014, 01:36 PM, and voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT. Please note that even though your alert was not sent to a Jury, it has been forwarded to the Administrators who review all alerts.

i was not the first to alert. i am sure jury felt we ought to "educate" him. or maybe he is merely being reasonable and is an allowable position on a democratic progressive board. oh. and i just served on jury with an alerter trying to silence strong black man. ya. community standards and all.

does anyone have the results?

i am bothered. how do others feel? cause i gotta tell you. i am sooooo fuggin' confused, after over ten years on du, what is acceptable and what is not, per our community standards. sooooo fuggin' confused.

[elleng]

1. The.post.was.not.anti-abortion.shit,

and.the.jury,on.which.I.sat,did.the.right.thing.

DISCUSS.this.important.social.issue.DISCUSSION.is.acceptable.

[seabeyond]

3. you want a discussion with a man stating at some point in the 10 months the fetus becomes a child?

why doesnt du just be di where all opinions are welcome instead of a democratic progressive board?

[Maedhros]

5. How do you know duracraft is a man? [n/t]

[seabeyond]

7. an educated guess. you want to put it to the test? oh wait. hit and run. he is not replying

to the MANY women challenging him.

[seabeyond]

9. by the way, an issue as big as womens bodily autonomy and reproductive rights, i see you nailed

the really relevant.

[Demit]

18. seabeyond, I think the poster was just being curious, that's all.

But now I'm curious. if it isn't relevant, why did you even bother to assume it was a man?

[uppityperson]

11. why.do.you.use.periods.between.words?

[elleng]

12. Loaner.computer.space.bar.not.working,

awaiting.new.part.for.mine.

[uppityperson]

13. Aha, that makes sense. I had a problem with my keyboard collecting cat fur and things not working.

[elleng]

14. I.do.try.to.make.sense,

whether.people.agree.with.me.or.not.

[Warpy]

20. I kill keyboards and mice with alarming regularity

so.I.feel.your.pain.

Damned space bar is always the first thing to go.

[elleng]

23. Not.a.habit.of.mine.

and.as.this.is.a.loaner.from.geek.friend.who.collects&refurbishes.them,I.can.sincerely.say.it.wasn't.my.fault!

Pain.in.the.neck,but.worse.was.yesterday.when.I.had.nothing!My.powerunit.connection.frazzled,so.had.to.order.another.A.few.days,I.guess.

[chervilant]

57. OMG!!!

Did you READ the post in question?!? You think it's acceptable for anyone--male OR female--to label a Feminist DUer's OP "intellectually dishonest drivel," just because that individual believes there is "zero debate" about the fact that a fetus becomes a child? You do not recognize this anti-choice rhetoric???

Furthermore, the post in question does not promote "discussion," particularly when it condescendingly misrepresents the OP and then tells the OP's author to "just stop it"!

**$KQ!34uy5^^(8r9&^(&^qr on a Cracker!

[ncjustice80]

77. Your decision supported regressive anti woman BULLSHIT.

[elleng]

80. No,my.decision.supported.discussion,

which,unfortunately,too.many.are.not.capable.of.

[ncjustice80]

82. Abortion, anytime, on demand. There is no discussion.

[seabeyond]

84. i appreciate your sincerity in your vote. he was a one time poster, hit. he had no interest

in discussion. simply to spew rw shit. he did not make another comment since. that is classic troll. it is tough enough trying to have any kind of civility on du. but with flat out trolls, with the purpose to disrupt, it makes du ugly, and exhausting for all of us, with a passionate democratic, progressive interests.

[elleng]

88. It.seems.to.me.the.hyper-heated.response.to.perceived.trolls

makes.du.ugly.I.respond.and.vote.on.the.merits,and.don't.concern.myself.with.possible.motives,and.others.should.too.imo.

[seabeyond]

90. then lets not have any boundaries at all and be DI?

[elleng]

92. Not.useful,imo,

but.I.do.agree.that.creating.and.enforcing.rules.are.both.difficult.

I'm.a.lawyer,so.it's.all.in.my.nature,in.the.family!

[PeaceNikki]

91. using the phrase "intellectually dishonest drivel" on a topic which

is simultaneously deeply important many Democrats (should be to all) and literally being legislated away from us while also, in essence, telling us to STFU about it... In your opening post here... Is the behavior of a troll. I've been here long enough see plenty and I think you have, too.

[seabeyond]

94. that is the point. he is an obvious troll. and we play all around it. i thought the hide would be

given. it would have been in the not so distant past.

first post out.... that says something.

[MadrasT]

124. Yes, "intellectually dishonest drivel"

is not a phrase that is indicative of someone who is interested in any kind of reasonable discussion.

[BlueJazz]

2. I very seldom vote "Hide" On that one, I would.

And this is why:This kind of thinking makes me SICK

And it really does a disservice to your point when you willingly espouse such intellectually dishonest drivel

[seabeyond]

4. good to know. i am really looking to see, if i am just so far off on this. my perception totally

skewed.

[BlueJazz]

8. Somebody is here for ...what? 3 minutes?? and they get to insult you?? I think not.

Calling ones post "Intellectually Dishonest Drivel" on your first communication is just rude and nasty.

[theHandpuppet]

47. Totally agree

I will keep an eye on further posts from this hit and run member. I suspect more of the same.

[bluestateguy]

6. I disagree with the poster

But when I in doubt I prefer to err on the side of debate rather than censorship and suppression.

There is no constitutional right to not be offended.

[seabeyond]

10. democratic board? looking around. progressive ideas and thoughts?

[uppityperson]

15. wtf. "There is no constitutional right to not be offended"?

This is a private forum with rules and guidelines.

[theHandpuppet]

48. Then you won't be offended if I say, "Bull"

If someone comes onto DU slamming people for supporting choice or LGBT rights, then that poster has obviously signed up to DU for the wrong reasons, to put it mildly. It's one thing to engage in spirited debate, it is quite another to drop in just to disrupt.

[mopinko]

16. always disgusted me

there have always been a few otherwise good dems here that were antiabortion, but for the most part, these kinds of views were an obvious tell.

i predict a short stay.

my advice with the current system, put them on ignore. a poster with 1 post and ten people ignoring him will get attention.

[JustAnotherGen]

17. That poster does not have

A Constitutional right to not be made sick at DU. They can trash the thread - you do not have to put them on ignore.

You were here first as was Kitty (prior to that poster) - thems the way the cookie crumbles. That one time poster can trash it if he doesn't like it.

It's not like kitty is holding a gun to his head and making him read it. He can take his outrage elsewhere.

[Warpy]

19. Oh, I think responders are doing a good job on that jerk

S/he was within the TOS, that's why the post was allowed to stand. It doesn't mean that heinous opinion is going unchallenged.

[seabeyond]

21. tos has nothing to do with letting a post stand. that is community standard. the administration

upholds the tos and i think they have a legitimate position in tos'ing the poster as anti abortion, against the democratic progressive requirements on du. stated well within tos.

but... lets be clear. tos has NOTHING to do with community standard in hiding a post.

[ismnotwasm]

22. An anti-abortion stance on DU is acceptable per Skinner

I asked him in ATA-- he said they would be watched and were in he minority but there are democrats that hold that POV.


I nearly left for good then.

Now I just take mini vacations.

[JoeyT]

40. I know Democrats that are still pissed the

party let all the n****rs and f****ts in. (In their words) I wonder if those would be allowed to hang around too?

[PeaceNikki]

45. Yup, I have had a few private conversations with him about it as well. Bullshit.

It's IN THE PARTY PLATFORM, FFS!!!!

[theHandpuppet]

49. +1000

As if folks should need to be reminded.

[ismnotwasm]

99. Yup

Pissed me off.

[Cartoonist]

24. Read the first two lines first!

I am pro-choice with NO exceptions.
This is a women's issue. Men like me may have opinions, but should have absolutely NO say in the matter.

I think what the OP is trying to say, is that even a fetus can become a child. Let's say a woman dies in a car crash. Her 8 month old fetus can be saved. It will have health issues, but preemies can live. Should they? Answer that one, seabeyond.

[seabeyond]

25. seriously? Answer that one, seabeyond.

[Cartoonist]

26. Well?

If, as you contend, that a fetus is not a child, should any effort be made to save it? I think so. If the being is wanted. I get the impression from your OP that fetuses must go through childbirth to be considered human. Now that I've answered it, how about you?

[seabeyond]

27. you have absolutely no reason to reach an outrageous conclusion. so, the youngest is 21 weeks and

6 days. are you stating at 21 weeks the fetus then becomes a child, because outside of the moms body, thru science, she was able to survive?

is that the qualifier of stating what is a child and not, during gestation?

[Cartoonist]

30. Why won't you answer the question?

It's a simple one. Should preemies be allowed to live? My answer is yes. It is based on compassion for human life. To say that something is just a fetus diminishes human life. Should abortions be allowed? Yes, because the Woman's need's are paramount.

I think you are afraid of admitting you have compassion for human life, and that your OP which denigrates the fetus as something less than human is a bit unthought out.

Also, there was absolutely nothing anti-abortion about the post you were offended by.

[oneshooter]

60. Jury results

On Mon Sep 15, 2014, 08:45 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Why won't you answer the question?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=50889

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This poster is all about anti-choice rhetoric and he's in a DU safe haven group for feminists. He is repeatedly attacking one of the group members in the process. This shouldn't be allowed anywhere on DU, but definitely is out of line in this group.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Sep 15, 2014, 09:09 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This post seems to be anti-abortion, but not anti choice. One can be anti-abortion without wanting to restrict it legally. In any case, I don't think this is an anti-feminist post.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If it is a protected group then the host should take care of this "problem". Not a matter for a jury.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see the poster gaining much traction in the apparent position having been fronted ,however it does seem to be about a position regards to the issue at hand -and wherever the poster is taking it,it is after all just an opinion . Everybody is entitled to their opiinion and everybody or nobody has to like it.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Maybe, just maybe, I would let this stand in GD. But absolutely not here.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Enough the anti choice rhetoric.

[ismnotwasm]

116. Actually a fetus is whatever a individual woman says it is

If she feels it's a blood sucking parasite and can't wait to get rid of it-- it's her body. If she decorated a nursery and picked out names-- it's her body.

The preemie argument is disingenuous and useless here. Preemies are often 'saved' through pain and a shitty quality of life, but they make it and are usually grateful. But a lot are not, and a lot end up with disabilities.

A human fetus is always human. That is not in question. What's lost in this convoluted argument is the basic human right for a woman to choose. That's the point.

[seabeyond]

28. picking out a time to call a fetus, a child during gestation can in no way lead you to conclude

the newborn, at any age, should be left to die.

the absurdity of your conclusion is telling.

[AuntPatsy]

29. Good response more than obvious what's going on, breathe

[Cartoonist]

32. Just what is going on?

Is there no one on this board who believes a fetus can become a human being?

A fetus is not a child.
How is that different from "A preemie is not a child?"

[DonCoquixote]

37. because

a preemie can be hooked to a machine and sustained. As anyone who has taken care of preemies or who has family members who were preemies, can tell, they do have a brain. First trimester Fetuses are just cells waiting for a process to begin, nothing more. As far as late term abortions, it is still the choice of the mother, and considering that the procedure is done when the mother's life is in danger, it is not a choice taken lightly.

[Cartoonist]

41. I am with you, Don

You seem to be saying that there is a difference in the fetus between the first term and late term. I feel the same way. I don't see seabeyond thinking that way.

Do preemies ever have the plugged pull on them? I have mixed feelings about that, but it's none of my business. A women's choice is not my business.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

119. None of your business. Keep repeating that. It really is: None of Your Business.

That is all you need to know about the subject.

Not your Fetus. Not your business.

Not your monkeys. Not your circus.

Just really none of your business. Not even if it is your girlfriend.wife.sister.aunt.cousin.

Unless and until, someone Asks for YOUR opinion/input/help it is None Of Your Business.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

137. and ALL of those decisions are up to the Woman. And is really None of our Business

unless and until the Woman decides to Make It Our Business.

She, of course, will want the Doctor's input but, the Ultimate Decision is HERS alone to make.

[seabeyond]

139. this is the point, that i was just saying to another. i do not discuss my personal views, because

they simply do not matter.

it is up to the woman, in the experience and i keep my damn mouth shut, and support her right to her decision.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

141. Exactly, that is why they are called personal views. derp. So simple.

Easy Peasy.

The easiest way to keep the nose clean is to keep it out of other people's business.

[seabeyond]

33. i got pissed at the DEMAND i answer. then it went down hill from there.

thanks aunt.

[Cartoonist]

39. No demands were made

While you are busy reviewing the first-timer's post for any anti-abortion message, you can review mine to show me where I made any demands. You don't have to answer my question, but why do you come here if not to discuss things?

[Sheldon Cooper]

50. No demands were made? Bull shit.

Stop coming in to a protected group and baiting. We can all see what's going on - NO ONE is fooled.

[Sheldon Cooper]

65. Not playing your game, "Cartoonist".

But do keep talking - everyone's watching.

[Cartoonist]

68. I hope they are being entertained.

Not surprised though that you won't play. You accuse me of something, then can't give an example. Because your accusation is just as wrong as seabeyond's.

[chervilant]

58. Well, three on the IL now, seabeyond...

I just don't have your patience, and I dislike strawman arguments...

[Cartoonist]

66. Where's the straw man?

I am getting bombarded with bogus accusations. So far, no one has been able to provide an example when called on it. Your turn, should you decide to participate further. You don't have to. I am not demanding that you do so.

[Cartoonist]

31. Whoa

So now you think a distinction can be made? That's called backtracking.

[seabeyond]

34. no. that is the argument you are making for the poster i called out.

you really like to make up your own stories to argue.

[Cartoonist]

35. Please answer the question.

A simple yes or no will do. Your refusal to answer is telling.

Here's another question:
Is a fetus nothing more than organic tissue, with no potential for humanity?
If that isn't the point of your original OP, than what was?

You called out the first-timer for spewing anti-abortion shit. Please show me where s/he made any such comment.

[DonCoquixote]

36. I will answer it

NO, a fetus is nothing more than tissue. Yes, it can become a human, but frankly, it is not. You might as well make a house out of oak planks made from Acorns, if potential equals the same as actually being something.

However, that should not be relevant to the question, because if someone wants to speak against abortion, Seabeyond, and many others, have the right to speak FOR it.

[Cartoonist]

38. Bad comparison

I would compare a fetus to a sapling. Something that has begun its journey to treedom. An acorn is pretty much inert. Also, no one is calling for an end to menstruation, so on that, we all agree. We begin to disagree as the fetus develops.

I have no objection for seabeyond to speak FOR it. If you've read my posts in this thread, you know I am 100% pro-choice. I would be bothered if some bible thumper came here and spoke against it for the same reasons seabeyond objects. The problem here though is that the first-timer made absolutely no comment that was anti-abortion. S/He was put off by seabeyond's dismissal of a fetus as anything more than organic tissue. I disagree with that too. I think the first-timer was wrong to call her thinking "sick", but hardly worth alerting.

[mercuryblues]

56. I would

compare a fetus to a seed buried underground and watered. When the seed matures and gets above ground it is a sapling. Just as when a fetus exits a mother's uterus it becomes a baby.

[Cartoonist]

63. I'm kind of with you here.

I think legally, a fetus does not achieve individuality until the umbilical cord is cut. Only then can it be bestowed with the rights of the rest of us. But I still think it is more proto-human in the late term, not just organic tissue.

[PeaceNikki]

46. If you've been here for any amount of time, you see them pop up often.

First time posters don't usually kick off their experience by telling people to STFU.

The anti-choice trolls are a very regular occurrence and it's sad you can't recognize one when you see it.

Has he/she been back to discuss it? Nope. It was a shit and run. That's what they do.

[Cartoonist]

67. Another one throwing themself on the gang pile?

First time posters don't usually kick off their experience by telling people to STFU.
-
I went back and re-read the post. You just told a lie.

[PeaceNikki]

69. are you kidding me?? why are you being nasty to me? get a grip

[Cartoonist]

74. Don't people read their own posts?

You claimed the first-timer said STFU. Was it edited out, or are you putting words in peoples mouths? I agree the words 'stop it' were used, but that contains no profanity. It takes a nasty person to put words like that in someone's mouth.

[seabeyond]

76. this is the problem with your arguments. your own, personalized, caricatures for insult

and derailing.

[Cartoonist]

85. ????

WTF (profanity mine) are you talking about? Are you going to give me an example? You don't have to answer.

[PeaceNikki]

79. I repeat, get a grip. That was a clear shit and run.

It included the words, "intellectually dishonest drivel". That asshole isn't here to play nicely. Was that you? Why are you so defensive of that shit and runner?

[Cartoonist]

93. I object to the word drivel

Otherwise, I object to seabeyond's disregard of a late term fetus' humanity.

As for the first-timer's post, I agree with the consensus that it was a hit and run and that we will never see another. So?

Here's the problem with the Democratic position on abortion. While it's important that a woman's life choices are hers and hers alone, it is not inclusive by calling anyone who thinks of life differently as being a stalker or worse. There is nothing wrong in believing in the humanity of a late term fetus. I like to think that those of us who are pro-choice can recognize that, but cede that the health and needs of the woman are more important. We can increase our numbers by showing the importance of choice. We can't do it by alerting on people and gang piling on someone who tries to make the distinction.

[PeaceNikki]

95. don't project your issues with others onto me.

That was my alert on the post in the op and I was trying explain to you why I saw it as a troll. you started the nasty with me. Not the other way around.

[Cartoonist]

101. go back

You were the first one to use the word "nasty". I await your apology. I'm not holding my breath.

[cyberswede]

111. "Another one throwing themself on the gang pile?"

That was your initial reply to PeaceNikki. Was that civil?

[Cartoonist]

113. Have you read this whole thread

When you're at the bottom of a gang-pile, it's hard to be civil.

[cyberswede]

115. Oh, I see. She made you do it.

[LanternWaste]

173. Your self-inflicted martyrdom is creative and entertaining...

Your self-inflicted martyrdom is creative and entertaining... an ominous soundtrack (Hans Zimmer, maybe?) would certainly give it the credibility it currently lacks.

[PeaceNikki]

123. after you got nasty... first. hold your breath for that apology..

Keep holding..

[seabeyond]

96. "disregard of a late term fetus' humanity." talk about irresponsibly putting words in others mouth

[Cartoonist]

105. perception

That's how I see it. Show me in your original OP where you displayed any positive emotion for a fetus.

[seabeyond]

106. omg... and this is the fuggin' game i called from your first post, on. you assign it to me and

back pedal with a weak, perception.

[Cartoonist]

108. I stand by everything I've said

I have back-pedaled in the past, but not here. Here's your chance to make a complete and total fool of me. Show me where you've recognized the humanity of a fetus. Go ahead and accuse me of playing games.

Dear Prudence, won't you come out, to play?

[seabeyond]

109. that is not my job to prove shit to you. you do not get to assign it to me, simply because

i have not discussed this aspect you are insisting i do.

it is a bullshit way to argue, and i wont play. you create a false argument, assign it to me as a fact, and then state it is YOUR perception. that is fuckin back pedaling.

night.

[cyberswede]

114. "Show me where you've recognized the humanity of a fetus."

What? Why should she have to show you anything?

The whole "humanity of a fetus" thing is some odd criteria you invented that doesn't really have anything to do with seabeyond's OP pointing out that a troll's post was left by a jury.

[Nye Bevan]

61. Since lots of jury results are being posted in this thread (I was juror #5):

On Mon Sep 15, 2014, 08:51 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Please answer the question.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=50895

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Demanding that a feminist in a safe haven group engage in this poster's anti-choice rhetoric is over the top rude, disruptive and inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Sep 15, 2014, 09:04 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree with the POV of the post, but I don't really see anything offensive about the post.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I just judge the post. I don't care what group it is posted in. And I see nothing here that needs hiding.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Agreement is not a given, this is a discussion board. The mere act of disagreeing is not being disruptive.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If HoF has a problem with it, it's a job for HoF's administrators. I don't see any DU rule breaking here, but the subforum may have its own rules and it's the hosts' job to enforce those.

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

[sheshe2]

42. Dayum! We did it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Mon Sep 15, 2014, 08:08 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

first time poster on du spewing anti abortion shit, stands.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/125550857

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

whining about a failed alert against the rules

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Sep 15, 2014, 08:45 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nice try alert stalker. Maybe better luck next time.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The seabeyond stalkers need to be banned. Their obsession with her has really gotten out of control. She hasn't even been back for hours and they are hunting her down again. The Admins need to look at the pattern of one in particular who is obsessed with seabeyond and ban him. This alerter should not be allowed to abuse this jury system anymore like this frivolous alert.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: WTF! Stop serial stalking seabeyond and other women of HoF. Does DU wish to go down in history as a Democratic site that allows misogynistic treatment of women. That makes us worse than the GOP because we are suppose to be better than that. In case some one does not know the meaning of MISOGYNISTIC, it is this. reflecting or exhibiting hatred, dislike, mistrust, or mistreatment of women. I am begging the admins. to look into this as I fear the outcome of this jury will NOT be in seabeyonds favor! Women are being run off a Democratic board and silenced here, that is not who we are, or is it? I fear for our parties future.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: it's meta but it's in HoF. They can regulate their own affairs.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

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

[theHandpuppet]

51. My response...

[sheshe2]

53. My response was #5!

And this too....





Brava

I was so scared of the outcome...sea has only been back a few hours and the stalkers are out.

Luv ya~

[MadrasT]

55. NICE.

[seabeyond]

70. this ONE, sheshe, is fun. thank you. to each and every juror. thank you.

what a treat walking back on the board tonight.

[sheshe2]

86. I admit I was scared....

I posted my response which took me some time and waited and kept refreshing to find out.

Luv ya sea! You deserved this win and you will see more, that is my hope!

[cyberswede]

98. Now THAT is a jury that understands what's going on.

Good job, all 7 of you.

To the alerter: shame on you.

[sheshe2]

102. Dayum, cyberswede,

you got that right! We did good.

To the alerter... agreed shame on them! Stop it Just Stop It! We will be heard and you can not tell us to sit down and shut up! THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC BOARD AND WOMEN WILL BE HEARD!

DEMOCRATS SUPPORT WOMEN...so the question is...hmmmm why is it that many here do not? Hmmm...interesting question that!

[seaglass]

127. The stars must have been aligned, I was on this jury too - no comments though :-)

Clearly alert stalking.

Also the subject of this thread has been MIRTed.

[sheshe2]

178. Now, that is alignment.

0-7 always go to MIRT! Good, hope it is sent along to the admins.

[PeaceNikki]

43. My alert. Here are results

On Mon Sep 15, 2014, 01:23 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

This kind of thinking makes me SICK
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5540269

REASON FOR ALERT

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

YOUR COMMENTS

Anti-choice troll - this is their first post.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Mon Sep 15, 2014, 01:36 PM, and voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I think it is dishonest to pretend that a fetus does not become a child at least a viability. The word police are at it again. Vote to Leave.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: One post wonder. Buh bye troll.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see any anti-choice sentiments stated in the post. He/she is debating the statement of the OP. I think that his/her point is weak at best. As is the OP's. Assuming the the debate is about a woman's right to have an abortion, both should stick to that. Disclaimer: I am very pro-choice in all cases as in, her body her choice. Baby or Fetus it's still her choice up to birth.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree with the alerter: I don't think this person is anti-choice. S/he is expressing an opinion and that is what DU is all about. Let it stand.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leave.it.and.discuss,unless.you.choose.to.not.discuss.one.of.the.large.issues.of.our.time.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The paragraph describing their own POV was without name calling and judgement. Most can accept differences of opinions. But what I thought was hideworthy, was the title, the first line and the last line. Tsk tsk...gotta learn to play more nicely.

[seabeyond]

72. thanks peace. nt

[sheshe2]

44. LOL!

[chervilant]

52. So, anyone can come into our group and chide us for addressing anti-choice rhetoric...

On Mon Sep 15, 2014, 07:20 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Bad comparison
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=50898

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Bringing this anti-choice rhetoric to a protected feminist group and then berating one of the group's members is disruptive, rude and inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Sep 15, 2014, 07:36 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I feel the other post should have been hidden as well. I cannot believe the anti-choice rhetoric being posted on this "democratic" forum.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seems like a Host issue to me.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agreed. Enough is enough.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

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

I am disgusted. I will have to add two more to my IL, and I STILL have to tolerate this crap! There is a war on women and women's rights, and it's right here on this "democratic" forum. Bleh.

[ScreamingMeemie]

54. Juror #3 here.

[seabeyond]

75. always good to see you screaming. nt

[seabeyond]

73. There is a war on women and women's rights, and it's right here on this "democratic" forum

point. and we are a feminist group, i would think we have an obligation to call it and discuss it. instead of repeatedly being hidden and kicked off the board.

seem pretty simple to me, too.

thanks.

[DonCoquixote]

81. I really wonder

if certain people at a site that rhymes with "Corruptionist" are pouring champagne.

Here's a fact MRA's, we know you got your snipers ready for seabeyond. I say snipers because you do not have the courage to face her directly. But the bad news is, we see you hiding in the trees.

[seabeyond]

87. lol... ya. and they also have their window open to be serving on the juries, too.

i was saying in another thread. community standard. we see it in a positive lite. but, it is not a positive or a negative. if enough rw'ers are in the jury pool, that community standard simply matches their beliefs. i really do not see that as something to aspire towards, nor insulted when we do not meet it.

as always, don, thank you.

[JustAnotherGen]

122. Yup!

Re coming into the group to disrupt.

We had this in the AA Group last week. A host received a hide for ohhhhhh - telling someone the truth.

[IdaBriggs]

136. Per Skinner, YES. This is NOT a protected group.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12596754

From Me:

Issue with Alert on "protected" group.

I recently juried an alert on a thread in a protected group. I do not believe the alerter was a contributor to the protected group (HOF) but was offended by the entire thread, and alerted on a long standing running joke while criticizing the thread.

My question: can non-members, or even people banned from a "protected group" alert on threads in these groups? While the issue occurred with HOF, it has probably come up with some of the other "controversy" groups, too, so as an inquiring mind, I would like to know.

Thank you!

From Skinner:

Anyone can alert in any group.

These allegedly "protected" groups are not protected from having to abide by DU community standards. Even people blocked out of a group can still alert there.

From Me:

Thank you for clarifying.

I am surprised there isn't more abuse of that particular feature in some of the more controversial groups, but what you say makes sense -- you want all of us to treat each other with dignity and respect as a community standard, even when dealing with difficult topics.

Thank you for the work you do. It is a good place to be on the internet.

Make of it what you will - personally, I think Skinner and the admins expecting us to treat each other with courtesy and respect even if we passionately disagree with each other is a reasonable community standard. Many of the "protected" groups (HoF gets a lot of attention, but we have other groups that deal with hot button controversy issues, too) can get ... "passionate" about expressing strong opinions.

There are at least half a dozen responses in this thread that struck me, personally, as abusive, demeaning, rude and insulting, but frankly, I have seen worse, and think some of it is just "personal style". It makes for interesting color in the community, but yes, it means those who are offended by such things *will* end up with more hidden posts. (Disclaimer: Recently got my first "non-Meta" hide in ten years by being snarky, so not on the perfect train myself. )

My husband and I have joked for a long time about "maybe certain people could pay 'extra' for a special license plate that would allow them to ignore speed limits - make it expensive and require special driving tests to be passed, and watch certain folks - including my husband - dive on that sucker!" Maybe DU needs a special Icon or Sig Line for "Yes, Sometimes I sound like an Asshole, but really, I have some Good Points and I truly VALUE being a part of this community, so cut me some slack, okay?"

Or something like that.

[JTFrog]

138. Actually it IS a protected group.

The History of Feminism group serves as a safe haven to discuss, and learn the history of feminism. Apply the lessons of historical and modern day feminist struggles to current issues and events that impact women. This group will also serve as safe haven for women (and supporters of feminism) to openly and honestly discuss and learn how the patriarchy affects women individually and collectively.

All Skinner was saying is that all DUer's are held to community standards. The group is a safe haven in that other DUer's are not allowed to come in and be disruptive and antagonistic to the group's Statement of Purpose.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

143. +1

This is, my guess, why a number of people have been blocked form this group.

They can't come in and play by the rules of the group, and since the juries tend to not hide such comments from them (all in the name of "more discussion&quot the only recourse is to block them.

The community standards of DU have consistently, albeit slowly, slid downhill towards Reddit/4chan territory, so the hosts of the safe haven groups have to use the only tools the admins have given them.

If juries would be more objective about their votes and stop leaving comments because they don't like the group or they don't like the person the alerted comment is replying to, I bet the hosts in some of these groups wouldn't have to put more people on their block lists.

Safe haven means exactly that.

[seabeyond]

146. this is clearly, exactly the point. why would we expect anything else. thank you. nt

[IdaBriggs]

144. Hmm. I can see what you are saying, but he definitely put the "protected" in quotes.

Possibly in response to my original email?

Putting the statement of purpose (above) together with the comments, perhaps that accounts for some of the confusion.

If I understand this correctly, coming in and saying "there is no patriarchy!" would be cause for banning, but discussing how *perceptions* of patriarchy vary would be acceptable to the statement of purpose.

Maybe?

I have to admit I have found many of the discussions started by members of this group educational ("rape culture" has been very eye opening), while some of it has been off-putting (the article that all male/female sex was inherently rape, or something like that just seemed odd).

Sometimes I mentally picture a bunch of warrior Maeneds dancing in circles around their confused victims while poking them with sharp pointed sticks, but I have a vivid imagination, and women howling at the moon and getting drunk in celebration of their own power makes me smile.

Some very powerful posters here, dealing with difficult issues - one of my favorite things about DU is how we make it work.

[seabeyond]

147. yes he did. he purposely put that there. you are right. and we all heard it loud and clear. nt

[JTFrog]

148. Yes, it's quite audible, even over all the "howling".

Passive aggressive shit makes my teeth hurt.

[seabeyond]

151. passive aggressive shit.... pisses me off. damn close to jsut saying we are stirring cauldrons,

with our brooms and pointy hats, lol.

or is that

cackling.

fug....

[IdaBriggs]

153. OMG NO!!! I did NOT mean my post in that fashion!!!

Please accept my apologies -- I was using, what to me, is a POSITIVE connotation!!!

I am so embarrassed.

[seabeyond]

156. throwin' my arm around you woman. i am dealing iwth this stuff, from like three directions.

i can deal.

[IdaBriggs]

163. Thank you for understanding.

And I am sorry for the miscommunication.

[IdaBriggs]

155. I apologize. My post was NOT intended as passive aggressive or insulting.

I have attempted to explain myself in a post directed to seabeyond, but apparently there are just days when the stuff in my head comes out as utter mush in the keyboard.

I was thinking about your post about the statement of purpose regarding patriarchy issues, and mentally went off on some matriarchy reading I had done a long time ago. To me, the imagery was about women being empowered at a time when they did not hold much power in the public sphere; somehow I apparently ended up with a complete fail at communication.

I am sorry.

[seabeyond]

157. and btw... i knew it was not way clear nad too lazy to clarify. my discussion about passive

aggressive was coming from a totally different place. i was only directing the howling, .... toward you, lol

[IdaBriggs]

162. So sorry! Some days...sigh.

This was one of the books I was thinking of ...

http://www.amazon.com/Women-Wolves-Clarissa-Pinkola-Est%C3%A9s/dp/0345409876/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=undefined&sr=1-1&keywords=women+who+run+with+the+wolves

"Women Who Run With the Wolves" -- From Publishers Weekly
Folklore, fairy tales and dream symbols are called on to help restore women's neglected intuitive and instinctive abilities in this earthy first book by a Jungian analyst. According to Estes, wolves and women share a psychic bond in their fierceness, grace and devotion to mate and community. This comparison defines the archetype of the Wild Woman, a female in touch with her primitive side and able to rely on gut feelings to make choices. The tales here, from various cultures, are not necessarily about wolves; instead, they illuminate fresh perspectives on relationships, self-image, even addiction. An African tale of twins who baffle a man represents the dual nature of woman; from the Middle East, a story about a threadbare but secretly magic carpet shows society's failure to look beyond appearances. Three brief, ribald stories advocate a playful, open sexuality; other examples suggest ways to deal with anger and jealousy. At times, Estes's commentary--in which she urges readers to draw upon and enjoy their Wild Woman aspects--is hyperbolic, but overall her widely researched study offers usable advice for modern women.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Somehow I seem to remember it as "Women Who Howl at the Moon!" (probably because I was reading "Drawing Down the Moon" in the same time period)

Again, I am sorry.

[seabeyond]

165. actually, i was feeling a connection and unity at the cauldron and cacklin', nothing wrong with a

bit of cacklin'. i am getting to old with the runnin.

[IdaBriggs]

166. Maiden, Mother, Crone - the original trinity.

I remember when I first came across that concept, and just being stunned - it was such an opposition to the "a woman got us tossed out of the Garden of Eden" blame-game. I am in the "Mother" phase of my life now, and I am fiercer than I was in the "Maiden" stage. I wonder if I will be "mellower" or "fiercer yet" when I am in the "Crone" phase -- I already feel so PROTECTIVE of not just my own children, but of other people's children, too; will it get stronger, when I see every child as "my grandchild"?

[seabeyond]

167. i just had a conversation about this early this morning.

i cannot really express all the fun of the experience because i am susceptible to attack and insult.

my kids are 19 and almost 17. i get to be done with the parenting. (i was way older having kids). but, i love this place in life. a knowledge, confidence, and an i do not give a fuck (roles and soiety dictate), mentality. lol

it is all good.

[seabeyond]

149. and then wow. reading the second half of your post. wow.

[IdaBriggs]

154. My comment was NOT intended as an insult.

I apologize if it came across that way. I was remembering imagery from ancient Greek mythology, trying to compare some of the "sharp verbiage" with "sharp pointed sticks", remembering Goddess centered religious reading ("Drawing Down the Moon", "When God Was a Woman" and "The Woman's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets&quot , and thinking how the "patriarchy vs matriarchy" theme was reflected in the statement of purpose in this group.

Apparently I completely botched the communication, and somehow ended up with cackling pointy hatted witches from MacBeth instead -- I apologize.

I am embarrassed about this miscommunication, and I apologize. My intent was NOT to be offensive, which obviously completely failed if it came across to you as passive aggressive and insulting.

Sigh.

Some days ... Sigh.

Again, I apologize.

[seabeyond]

158. and again....

[IdaBriggs]

164. Thank you!!!

[JTFrog]

168. Hell the first post was taking swipes at people in here.

"abusive, demeaning, rude and insulting", and something about an icon or sigline...

All while trying to state that this is NOT a protected group.

I can't imagine why I took the other post the way I did.

[IdaBriggs]

170. Again, JTFrog, I apologize.

Trust me when I say that when I am *trying* be obnoxious, I do a much better job at it!!!

a) There are some Very Sharp Tongued Posters in here - I stand by that!

b) There is confusion *to me* about what "protected groups" mean, and I am not just talking about HoF. I decline jury requests in the Israeli/Palestine group because I just don't have enough familiarity with the players to tell when someone is going off the rails or not (unless it is really blatant). I shared the response from "Ask the Admins", then was thinking about the "statement of purpose" and how the whole thing should be tying together.

c) I would pay extra for a "get out of jail" free icon/sigline like I was talking about, just like my husband would happily pay extra for a "free speeding privileges" license plate (available only in our imagination). I think it would be useful for some of our posters, but again, apparently I am suffering from "mush brain" and my communication skills are not up to par today. It was supposed to be humorous; obviously, FAIL.

I think I have addressed the rest of my thought process in the other posts. My intent was not to offend, and again, I am sorry for the miscommunication.

Fortunately, seabeyond was gracious enough to accept my apology for disrupting her thread. I have been here at DU for over ten years now, and can only hope you realize that, while I am *definitely* strongly opinionated, I do have a great deal of respect for my fellow DUers, even when we passionately disagree about different topics.

Peace?

[chervilant]

175. Is "not protected" an open invitation?

I still do not understand why spewing anti-choice rhetoric and berating feminist DUers got a 3-4 leave it vote from a jury. How sad that so many "progressives" are willing to allow this on this site.

[seabeyond]

176. i was talking to another, on a totally unrelated part of du, it is certainly NOT a level playing

field. for sure.

[chervilant]

59. BTW, I am not confused.

I feel like I'm getting a clear message from the admins that sexism and misogyny will NOT be addressed. Also, they must know who is (are?) alert-stalking you, and I find it abhorrent that the stalker(s) get away with it!

[Nye Bevan]

71. Skinner has said that "alert-stalking" does not exist (nt)

[seabeyond]

78. thank you chervilant. i do think that everything is crystal clear, and have been given a thumbs up.

what bothers me is how embolden the anti progressive crowd has become without a care, yet, us progressive must tippey toe around.

[chervilant]

125. Excellent summation of what's been

niggling at me every time I take a hiatus from this forum. If it weren't for brave feminist DUers, SCE on Sundays, xchrome, and n2doc, I'd be long gone.

My ignore list is ginormous, and I am so very glad I don't have to see the vitriol spewed by the sexists and misogynists who've infiltrated this site.

[Nye Bevan]

62. I don't see any "anti-abortion shit" in that post.

In fact, I don't see any mention of abortion at all.

I'm pro-choice but I also believe that a 37 week old fetus is a living baby, not just "another organ" as some DUers are saying.

[Cartoonist]

83. Welcome to the stalkers club, Nye

While I've been a member here on DU for many years, my post total is low because I usually only contribute an item here or there. I dislike heated arguments. But I really dislike what has happened here. I never met seabeyond before today, yet I am accused of stalking. seabeyond accused the first-timer of spewing anti-abortion shit, but can't point to a single word to support her charge. Also, it appears that recognizing the humanity of a late term fetus is misogynistic. I support a woman's right to choose. I don't support anyone's right to make false accusations, either against me or anyone else.

[seabeyond]

89. "I don't support anyone's right to make false accusations" "stalkers club"

[Cartoonist]

97. Thanks

I know it wasn't you accusing me and others of being stalkers. Thanks for calling them on that BS.

[seabeyond]

100. see, you play the passive aggressive game in wording. and that is considered "civil"

it is a conversation we have had in the recent past. i have never been much into the coy passive aggressive. i get the purpose is to be casual enough that others outside looking in do not get the game, that only the people you direct the action to understands the insult. personally, i have always felt that passive aggressive behavior was cowardly and dishonest. not my thing at all.

[Cartoonist]

103. What do you mean, "we"?

it is a conversation we have had in the recent past
-
I never had any such conversation with you. I never met you before today.
I suppose it is possible that I have forgotten. I am old. I will apologize if you can furnish such a post.

[seabeyond]

104. myself and others on the board have had a lot of discussion on passive aggressive behavior, recently

[Cartoonist]

107. Clear

I tend to be passive, but yeah, I will become aggressive when being gang-piled on and have false accusations hurled at me. I can also quickly cool down as soon as an olive branch is extended, or when respect returns.

[sheshe2]

110. Cartoonist

You are posting in a group, not on GD. They have a mission statement, please read and follow it. Thank you in advance.

[Cartoonist]

118. From the statement

to openly and honestly discuss
-
The juries regarding these threads seem to support me. Perhaps that's a false perception. I haven't seen any honesty or openness from those who gang-piled on me.

unrelated:
Hi sheshe2. You gave me a friendly comment the other day. Thanks. I will stay clear of this group in the future.

[JTFrog]

133. They supported you right up to the point that they locked you out of the thread.

(Well it looks like there were a couple of other close calls....)

We all know that juries are pretty slow to discourage disruptive behavior but eventually they figure it out.

[sheshe2]

121. The Mission Statement of HoF. Statement of Purpose

This, Cartoonist is the mission statement for HoF

The Mission Statement of HoF

Statement of Purpose

The History of Feminism group serves as a safe haven to discuss, and learn the history of feminism. Apply the lessons of historical and modern day feminist struggles to current issues and events that impact women. This group will also serve as safe haven for women (and supporters of feminism) to openly and honestly discuss and learn how the patriarchy affects women individually and collectively.

All your points can be made in GD. I am not a HoF host. I am a BOG host. You need to understand the difference in posting in a group and a forum. DU has rules.

[seabeyond]

180. i know you are blocked. i wanted to point out. no one claimed you were a stalker.

i believe where you were reading about stalker, others were talking about ALERT stalkers. they go after our posts, but i believe they were talking about my alert starkers particularly. i am not reading all the posts in this thread. but i do not recall anyone calling you a stalker.

i thought you were calling the members of our group stalkers, you know, following along and commenting on your posts.

but i do not believe anyone called you a stalker. just to clear shit up. again, i know you cannot respond, but you can pm me.

[Cartoonist]

112. Leaving this thread

Not getting anywhere. Why continue.

Things I learned today.
Respecting the humanity of a late term fetus is misogynistic.
Jury verdicts are misogynistic.
Disagreeing with someone means you are a stalker.
Some people like to make false accusations and then play the victim when asked to show proof.

[cyberswede]

117. Well, I did see one post wherein someone played the victim.

Cartoonist (563 posts)
113. Have you read this whole thread

When you're at the bottom of a gang-pile, it's hard to be civil.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125550857#post113

[alp227]

171. AGAIN a 3-4 "leave it alone"

On Tue Sep 16, 2014, 11:25 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

Leaving this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=50976

REASON FOR ALERT

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

YOUR COMMENTS

"Respecting the humanity of a late term fetus is misogynistic." Really? With this user's twisted right wing logic, the supermajority of women in the world are misogynists for not having late term abortions. This user has been concern trolling and being condescending to others in lots of posts here. Enough already with these crazy accusations and rude remarks besides the right wing terminology used to frame reproductive rights.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Sep 16, 2014, 11:51 AM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leave it. It doesn't add anything new he hasn't already said. Hoping he keeps his word and leaves the thread.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Typical DU post, nasty and personal. There are thousands like it on the site each day. I'd prefer we discuss issues rather than fellow DUers, but I don't run the place
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Opinions are one thing. Whining about them is another.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Disagree with the alerter, poster is aware that his remarks are offensive and has bowed out of the thread, let this go.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you.

Juror #3 expresses learned helplessness, with the logic that because of "1000s" of other personal nasty posts this one should be left alone.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

174. What's curious about Juror #3's post is that Skinner has pretty much said...

That we do run this place. Supposedly, DU is all community driven now, and the admins have little power anymore.

Save for the ability to ban long-term posters, something I think nobody else has. As powers go, it's a big one.

[PeaceNikki]

126. Yes, like false accusations of victimhood by claiming people are 'piling on' poor you. Buy a mirror,

ffs

[Tuesday Afternoon]

120. wow. what a thread.

but, I do like that 0-7 jury verdict

[NuclearDem]

128. Well, fortunately it seems that poster got a nice late-term banning.

[PeaceNikki]

129. Good. The jurors and those defending the troll should be ashamed.

I just served on a 7-0 jury to whack an anti union troll. First post trolls on hot topics are common, but juries tend to be lenient towards the misogynistic and anti choice trolls. Like I said up thread: using the phrase "intellectually dishonest drivel" on a topic which is simultaneously deeply important many Democrats (should be to all) and literally being legislated away from us while also, in essence, telling us to STFU about it... In your opening post here... Is the behavior of a troll. I've been here long enough see plenty.

[theHandpuppet]

130. Exactly

Also, didn't you get the feeling this wasn't this poster's first incarnation here?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

131. Exactly! Had I been on that Jury I would have voted to Hide For MIRt =

Last edited Tue Sep 16, 2014, 11:02 AM - Edit history (1)

Clean up on Aisle Four.

To my way of Thinking The above Jury Result is indicative of how infested this place is with Libertarian Ideology. I don't know if it was always here and it is unintended consequence of the Self-Moderation of DU3. Since, that *Freshly Scrubbed NEWBIE Poster* used the term = "intellectually dishonest drivel" to describe a plank in the Democratic Party platform, I would have had no choice but, to conclude he was a disruptor up to no good.

[PeaceNikki]

132. Yup. Anti-union - SWIFT hide and shown the door. Anti-woman - "Oh, they are just voicing their

opinion!! Don't be the thought/word police!"

We get it, DU.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

134. The Message comes in Loud and Very Clear and, since the Democratic Platform does NOT condone

that opinion it leaves me with one conclusion to make about DU3. Whether the Admin intend this or not, DU3 is NOT upholding Democratic Principles. Gee Thanks, Jury System. and I guess I should Thank Obama, too ....

<---- clue for the clueless

[Tuesday Afternoon]

135. Thanks, NuclearDem. Better Late than Never ...

[TBF]

140. The democratic platform is pro-choice -

it boggles my mind that it is not the same on this website that purports to support the party.

[seabeyond]

142. you know. lets quit being hysterical women and simply be pragmatic, factual. guy stuff.

democratic progressive board. respect the platform.

i can be a boss of few words, too.

[hlthe2b]

150. The poster, Cartoonist has been blocked

reason: continually accusing pro-choice feminists in a safe haven forum of "lacking in humanity"

[Sheldon Cooper]

152. Thanks!

[seabeyond]

159. +1, only to show support, though i know you know. and meh.... to the poster, lol. nt

[PeaceNikki]

169. Thank you!

[alp227]

160. User has been PPR'ed

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=317438&sub=trans

[seabeyond]

161. thank you. i heard. i thought about editing, but meh... lots of conversation in this thread,

about a lot of issues. he really was not much of the point. thanks alp, always.

[ismnotwasm]

172. Interesting

Blocked member's profile page.

[PeaceNikki]

177. look at this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/123028302

[ismnotwasm]

179. Saw that

Served on a jury. It was allowed to stand because of the lack of background is my belief