General Discussion

stone space

(6,498 posts)

151. Jury results

Wed Jun 4, 2014, 10:47 AM

Jun 2014

On Wed Jun 4, 2014, 10:33 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I don't think you do agree with me in principle.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5047834

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This person is 1) mis-characterizing my statements in order to make a bogus point. Saying that there are reasons why you cannot hang the whole NSA thing around Obama's neck is not at all the same as advocating to "let Holder and Yoo and Gonzo decide such things however they wish." And 2) Questioning my motives instead of addressing what I actually posted. Not cool.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jun 4, 2014, 10:44 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This might be the worst alert I have ever seen. If someone mis-characterizes your statements, refute them. Their statement about your intent was clearly presented as their opinion/impression...correct that impression if it's wrong. Don't try to get their post hidden and their voice silenced in that thread.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: So, let me get this straight. The alerter is the person whom this reply is to? Instead of using the jury system, why not try an actual rebuttal. There is nothing inappropriate or disruptive with this post. How about we ban the alert for Jury misuse?
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: DON'T USE ALERTS TO DEBATE POINTS YOU HAVE TROUBLE MAKING IN THE THREAD. I WISH I COULD ALERT ON YOUR ALERT. ALERT FAIL. ALERT FAIL. ALERT FAIL (there I said it thrice).
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the alerter really is Luckythedog, then I'm a little embarrassed for you that you would send this weak alert. Just respond to the replier.

But maybe someone else posted the alert and made it seem to be Luckythedog
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Frivolous alert. There is nothing uncivil here. Nothing.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: A good example of a post not worthy of an alert.
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.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

174 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Top 5 Claims That Defenders Of The NSA Have To Stop Making To Remain Credible - EFF [View all] WillyT Jun 2014 OP

Why didn't the NationalSpyAgency stop the greatest threat to national security since 9/11 ... GeorgeGist Jun 2014 #1

Why didnt the NSA stop 9/11? They were incapable, apparently. nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #77

They Had The Data billhicks76 Jun 2014 #87

I find the need to label someone that is interested in regaining freedoms and liberties as a rhett o rick Jun 2014 #95

Just Words billhicks76 Jun 2014 #108

It's naive for anyone to think that gaining power isnt the goal of most in politics. rhett o rick Jun 2014 #109

There are plenty of non-libertarians who are interested in regaining freedoms and liberties Fortinbras Armstrong Jun 2014 #120

Good luck with your idea of a name the the logical fallacy. I think there is one but it's too early rhett o rick Jun 2014 #124

The hijackers were staying in a hotel Mnpaul Jun 2014 #90

"If you are looking for a needle in a haystack, the last thing you want to do is make the stack larg rhett o rick Jun 2014 #104

Wow! Those are almost verbatim what we hear here on DU... riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #2

No it won't. bvar22 Jun 2014 #113

Now if I was arguing for a RW talking point I would link RW talking point sites. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #3

And That Would Put You In Trouble... WillyT Jun 2014 #4

Never said it was, I posted IF i was arguing a RW talking point I would link a RW site. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #31

In other words Aerows Jun 2014 #55

What kind of a site is it? Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #59

A non profit site for starters Aerows Jun 2014 #62

They have an explanation on their web site, like I say if I want to have site to link to then Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #65

You indicated that it was a right wing site Aerows Jun 2014 #66

I never said it was a RW site, Willy answered something to that effect and you have said it also. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #67

hmm malokvale77 Jun 2014 #70

Ann Richards Aerows Jun 2014 #74

Isn't that the truth (nt) malokvale77 Jun 2014 #76

You must have read the wrong post, I NEVER SAID NSA SPYING IS A RW TALKING POINT> Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #97

I read what you posted (nt) malokvale77 Jun 2014 #111

Since you've brought it up, what have you said about it? merrily Jun 2014 #131

You ask a lot of questions. Cant you make statements? What kind of a site do you think rhett o rick Jun 2014 #78

It apparently Aerows Jun 2014 #82

You're suggesting the EFF is a right wing organization? Warren DeMontague Jun 2014 #68

Just connected to nothing at all, huh? Marr Jun 2014 #93

EFF is totally rightwing! Dr. Strange Jun 2014 #69

I know Aerows Jun 2014 #75

Are you trying to claim Aerows Jun 2014 #13

And if Willy was, that advice might even be appropriate. Pholus Jun 2014 #63

It's ridiculous Aerows Jun 2014 #64

If you are trying to make a point, I sure aint getting it. nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #96

k/r marmar Jun 2014 #5

some random person will be here soon to explain this questionseverything Jun 2014 #6

And if you call about a close relative's medical condition -- would that act get you killed? Bernardo de La Paz Jun 2014 #18

Joe Biden (version 2006) knew how dangerous the Meta-Data collection is: bvar22 Jun 2014 #114

Recommend! KoKo Jun 2014 #7

du rec. xchrom Jun 2014 #8

Most excellent post. Thanks. JEB Jun 2014 #9

Why post this on DU? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #10

There are defenders here Savannahmann Jun 2014 #11

I have not seen any/many ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #20

Olenty of NSA defenders. 840high Jun 2014 #23

Okay. Thanks for the clarification. eom. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #25

The anti-Greenwald/Snowden people Savannahmann Jun 2014 #27

So love Snowden and/or Greenwald or Love the NSA? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #28

Not at all Savannahmann Jun 2014 #30

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said... In Both Your Posts Here !!! WillyT Jun 2014 #81

Well said n/t Aerows Jun 2014 #84

Thank you. Right to the point. nt elias49 Jun 2014 #99

Well said. zeemike Jun 2014 #103

No requirement for ideological purity there! baldguy Jun 2014 #105

Posts that begin with "SO" and followed by a fantasy statement that NOBODY has made... bvar22 Jun 2014 #115

If the pentagon papers were released today shaayecanaan Jun 2014 #121

There are a number of posters that assert that the NSA's surveillance activities Maedhros Jun 2014 #32

I think you misunderstand what people are saying ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #34

"Those in charge of these programs know more about what is happening that we do" Aerows Jun 2014 #42

But that's the thing ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #71

It is a quite popular opinion here Aerows Jun 2014 #73

So your beef is not ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #79

Which agencies serve at the behest of the President of the United States? Aerows Jun 2014 #83

I'll do it this way ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #86

Oh, I see Aerows Jun 2014 #88

No ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #125

So you don't mind criticism of the NSA shaayecanaan Jun 2014 #122

Posts that begin with "SO" and followed by a fantasy statement that NOBODY has made... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #127

Posts that contain bare assertions shaayecanaan Jun 2014 #174

Please quote the provision of the Constitution that charges Congress with oversight of the merrily Jun 2014 #143

It's the whole idea behind the Separations of Powers Doctrine ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #154

Regardless of what the NSA is or is not supposed to be, our govt. is not supposed to merrily Jun 2014 #132

Yet all of these arguments are in response to those who express concern with the growing Maedhros Jun 2014 #46

Well rebutted tkmorris Jun 2014 #100

Well Done. bvar22 Jun 2014 #116

Excellent! neverforget Jun 2014 #119

Maedhros is one of the most discerning posters on this board. merrily Jun 2014 #130

The Constitution restricts government, not corporations. merrily Jun 2014 #136

Very true ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #153

You missed the point. You can focus on corporations all you want, but you merrily Jun 2014 #155

It's awfully hard to see trees Aerows Jun 2014 #41

Those that openly disparage Snowden and Greenwald refuse to explain what they think about rhett o rick Jun 2014 #80

No ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #85

You say "the vast majority" have separated the two issues. First I really wonder how you know how rhett o rick Jun 2014 #102

Everyone who disagrees with you is not seeing things as they are? Only you are? merrily Jun 2014 #133

Those that defend the NSA and the CIA Aerows Jun 2014 #89

Name one poster parroting the 54 attacks myth. joshcryer Jun 2014 #49

I might give you that one Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #92

Mixed opinion on 3 and 5. joshcryer Jun 2014 #94

This is why I put them on ignore. Savannahmann Jun 2014 #112

I see nothing about 54 attacks there. joshcryer Jun 2014 #118

Yes. There are defenders of the NSA here. dawg Jun 2014 #106

Yes, there are. There are also here people who remain strangely quiet about the NSA merrily Jun 2014 #126

Come onnnn, Merrily ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2014 #129

I have no idea what "Your first response answers my "odd post" means. merrily Jun 2014 #134

Recommend. n/t Jefferson23 Jun 2014 #12

The talking points. Recommended Willy Autumn Jun 2014 #14

Boom! Aerows Jun 2014 #15

+1 Go Vols Jun 2014 #16

Thank you, Willy Jack Rabbit Jun 2014 #17

Thank You For Sharing cantbeserious Jun 2014 #19

K&R woo me with science Jun 2014 #21

Thanks. k/r 840high Jun 2014 #22

I don't defend the NSA program, but... LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #24

Has Obama really instituted far MORE judicial oversight than Bush? Maedhros Jun 2014 #33

Obama at least uses the FISC LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #36

Thank you for providing a link. Maedhros Jun 2014 #38

A couple things LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #48

If this is true: Maedhros Jun 2014 #56

I get that. LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #60

FISA court warrants are a joke anyway. merrily Jun 2014 #135

"Legal" authority. Legal being the key word. merrily Jun 2014 #137

I absolutely agree with you in principle LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #145

I don't think you do agree with me in principle. merrily Jun 2014 #146

I am being realistic LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #147

I disagree. Doing little but defending the status quo is not realism. merrily Jun 2014 #150

ONCE AGAIN LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #157

ONCE AGAIN, spare me. merrily Jun 2014 #162

So, not only do I have to agree that the NSA porgram should end... LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #164

More stuff I never said. Please, have pity on the straw men. They need their rest, too. merrily Jun 2014 #165

Yes, you did. LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #167

Don't keep attributing to me lame stuff you make up. merrily Jun 2014 #168

Jury results stone space Jun 2014 #151

And the jury results are in... aikoaiko Jun 2014 #152

I was going to post this, too! Lizzie Poppet Jun 2014 #156

I guess it's OK to attack a person's motives on DU now LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #159

Nice straw man. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2014 #173

So smearing me is not good enough? LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #158

It's jut not your lucky day, is it? aikoaiko Jun 2014 #169

Honestly... BlueCheese Jun 2014 #45

You give people a lot of credit... LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #51

The impact on your of the rise of the tea party is not exactly a merrily Jun 2014 #138

Never said it was LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #149

You hit the nail on the head Aerows Jun 2014 #53

? Posts of yours on this very thread are, in essence, defenses of the NSA's actions. merrily Jun 2014 #140

Only if you look at this simplistically LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #148

Force you to do the right thing? Savannahmann Jun 2014 #170

Responsibility should be shared. Congress should be involved. Period. LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #171

The # 1 ctsnowman Jun 2014 #26

Amen Aerows Jun 2014 #43

And that is the main point! Pholus Jun 2014 #61

K&R.... daleanime Jun 2014 #29

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #35

Afternoon kick. I see the usual crowd is ignoring this thread.... nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #37

Well what did you expect Savannahmann Jun 2014 #39

Oh agreed on all fronts. Kick! nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #50

They are absolutely terrified Aerows Jun 2014 #44

I've bookmarked this thread and the article. The next time they use one of these talking points riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #52

The circular arguments they make Aerows Jun 2014 #54

Do they actually attempt to argue? vi5 Jun 2014 #128

If they didn't use BS propaganda talking points, they'd have no other way to Zorra Jun 2014 #40

Precisely Aerows Jun 2014 #47

Except that the alleged absence of any defense of the NSA by them is also a talking point. merrily Jun 2014 #139

They're not NSA defenders. vi5 Jun 2014 #57

That is just sick, bvar22 Jun 2014 #117

I am not so sure that they can or will go back to their 2006 stances. merrily Jun 2014 #144

Not true LuckyTheDog Jun 2014 #161

Don't forget to ProSense Jun 2014 #58

What a coincidence this is happening now! nt Logical Jun 2014 #98

this does not belong here Enrique Jun 2014 #72

That was my first thought Mnpaul Jun 2014 #91

You got that right. These talking points, although lame, are Vattel Jun 2014 #107

K&R!! elias49 Jun 2014 #101

I don't find anything in this article... yallerdawg Jun 2014 #110

Title should be: "How To Construct A Straw Man In 5 Easy Steps" baldguy Jun 2014 #123

''No President should fear public scrutiny of his program.'' Octafish Jun 2014 #141

The one thing Snowden/Greenwald defenders need to remain credible. randome Jun 2014 #142

hard to explain to those who refuse to see questionseverything Jun 2014 #160

I think it's a hard line to straddle. randome Jun 2014 #163

yes that is how it looks to you because you do not revere the Constitution questionseverything Jun 2014 #166

asking for evidence = refuse to see?!?!?! REALLY?! tia uponit7771 Jun 2014 #172