I liken using Facebook to being a scab or crossing a picket line.there is a BOYCOTT.

[hlthe2b]

86. You don't know that any of those jurors found it disrupive. No jury voted to hide

This, as you previously admitted was a unique situation. Most of us believe disruption implies MALIGN disruption, not that which could be widely construed as helpful. My prior time on MIRT showed these kinds of things happening on occasion. The best resolutions came when MIRT did not act unilaterally, but instead forward it to admins for them to weigh in--which then made it more clear for the future. Likewise, it afforded admins the opportunity to see if they want to address the issue more widely with a change to the wording for juror instructions, to the TOS, a system-wide announcement or simply for MIRT.

That poster may well have been the most sincere, if not naive' of newbies. Intolerance of obviously malign and intentionally disruptive behavior is to me what MIRT was designed for and those kinds of posters are fortunately pretty obvious. But, with those who come with what appears to be BENIGN intent from the valid content they posted that was in no way misleading, harmful, nor in opposition to our joint aims, to determine they are disruptive for overly posting is a very different issue.

There is a Latin phrase: "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius" that loosely translates to "Kill them all and let God sort it out."
When we lump those who post malign content with those who overly post that which is clearly not, I fear this is the DU equivalence.