Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
326. Since you accused me of lying- here you go- the ugly truth about the hosts forum:
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:15 PM
Jun 2014

(anyone who wants to go straight to the heart of it- scroll to Post #44 an the replies to it)


Agschmid (8,333 posts)

1. GDH - I posted in that thread so no vote from me.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:48 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

2. Kicking... open to NAGDH input since it seems to be a light GDH night.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:55 PM

greatauntoftriplets (139,682 posts)

4. Frankly, it's a question he should ask Skinner.







And that's all I'm going to say, just wanted to help out even a little bit. Good luck with this.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greatauntoftriplets (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:57 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

5. Thanks!










Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #5)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:58 PM

greatauntoftriplets (139,682 posts)

6. You're welcome!







Bedtime for me.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:52 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

3. Got a pass from a jury, just FYI not related to our decision.








AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:45 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Let's Keep Score Here... Grasswire Just Got A Second Strike...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025035784

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is ridiculous. Meta is dead and GD is not this person's individual forum to endlessly complain about any perceived "slights" he feels have been bestowed. Completely inappropriate for this forum

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:48 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I should hide because, META. but 50% of GD is META now it seems. I am not willing to hide this META unless all META gets hidden.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Baaaaaaaah!
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: alerter can go suck eggs. turning alertds into meta is better.

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


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:41 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

18. Whining about DU is an SOP violation and that is a host decision.







Juries are not responsible for hiding SOP violations. But we are responsible for locking them.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 10:59 PM

Warren Stupidity (37,298 posts)

7. gdh leave wsc









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:00 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

8. Thanks.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:58 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

34. Can can you provide a strong rationale for ignoring the GD SOP?









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #34)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 07:49 AM

Warren Stupidity (37,298 posts)

121. Well I replied before I saw the nonsense that happened here.







Don't lock threads with no consensus. Doing so causes hosting to be painful. Please stop.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:05 PM

X_Digger (15,433 posts)

9. GDH- leaning lock, but WSC.







It is meta bullshit, but meta has been getting a pass recently.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to X_Digger (Reply #9)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:09 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

11. Thanks.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:05 PM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

10. GDH - Leave.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #10)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:09 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

12. Thanks.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #10)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:58 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

33. Can can you provide a strong rationale for ignoring the GD SOP?









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:10 PM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

13. Leave. n/t









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Autumn (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:58 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

32. Can can you provide a strong rationale for ignoring the GD SOP?









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #32)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 07:46 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

119. Is that required? A new rule perhaps?Can you provide a strong rationale







for locking posts you don't like and ignoring the votes of GD hosts to side with non GD hosts who just so happen to be the alerters?
Many hosts have put leave only in the subject line. And can you be anymore fucking rude? Since when do you get to put up new rules?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:31 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

14. Whining about jury decisions is not a jury issue, it's SOP and this should be locked.







GD hosts have a very narrowly defined jurisdiction and this is one of the few things is in it. There's no excuse for not locking. But considering the players I'm not going to waste the effort of going rogue and then dealing with the stupid shite that would inevitably follow. If GD hosts want to screw around instead of doing their rather elementary and easy job, fine, screw around.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:40 PM

Rhiannon12866 (61,576 posts)

17. Not currently a GD host, but I agree with you







"Whining about DU" is clearly prohibited in the GD SoP.

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:37 PM

Rhiannon12866 (61,576 posts)

15. Another alert:







Author: WillyT
Let's Keep Score Here... Grasswire Just Got A Second Strike...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025035784
Alerted by berni_mccoy: Whining about DU


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Rhiannon12866 (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:39 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

16. Hoo boy. This one needed to be locked up an hour ago.







Thanks for bringing this alert in Rhiannon as I know you're not a GD host.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #16)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:42 PM

Rhiannon12866 (61,576 posts)

19. No, I'm not at the moment, but GD alerts are the only ones on the list right now...







And most of them are about this particular thread.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Rhiannon12866 (Reply #19)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:45 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

20. 5 in just over an hour.







I think we're creating a problem, not solving a problem.




Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #20)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:47 PM

Rhiannon12866 (61,576 posts)

21. The way I look at this, DUers have spoken







Just my two-cents...


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Rhiannon12866 (Reply #21)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:42 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

44. The DU'ers have spoken? Those DU'ers are not hosts. The hosts voted to leave.







All of the alerters are in the same Group. They can get 10 more alerts if they want. It isnt about how many alerts there are it's up to the hosts.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:45 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

47. Yup.







Last edited Mon Jun 2, 2014, 07:45 AM - Edit history (1)

ETA: So I feel like I have to qualify my statement before I get called out on something I didn't mean. I just meant that regardless of the fact that there are "x" alerts it doesn't indicate whether the DU "community" feels a certain way about a thread, IMO. That is all.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:51 AM

Rhiannon12866 (61,576 posts)

50. My point is that if there are more than one or two alerts







The hosts should take that into consideration and reevaluate. But it's up to you...


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:21 AM

Number23 (16,246 posts)

83. "All of the alerters are in the same Group."







And this, better than ANYTHING anyone else could have typed, is the crux of the host problem right here.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Number23 (Reply #83)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:46 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

88. you said it right there.







my jar dropped when I saw that. five alerts is nothing if you don't like the DUers, I guess. that would be the group right there.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #88)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:01 AM

Number23 (16,246 posts)

94. "five alerts is nothing if you don't like the DUers" You nailed it







As many times as you and I have bumped heads over the years, I guess we're in the "same group" because rhett o rick doesn't like us. Which is perfectly fine with me, in all honesty, but that certainly does make one question his "fitness for duty".

That person is far too preoccupied with keeping up with what "group" is doing what instead of enforcing the SOP of the forum. We all know he's by no means alone in that regard, but it's still pretty amazing to see out in the open.

Edit: And actually it was SIX alerts by long time DUers that all need to be ignored, apparently.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Number23 (Reply #94)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:09 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

97. I know, I just looked at the group and said WHUT?







I can't remember any agreeable conversations with any of them except for Nikki, actually. Wow. I feel like I've really neglected Zappaman now, ha ha.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #97)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 06:48 AM

PeaceNikki (21,150 posts)

116. What should we call our "Group"? Pussy is already taken.







BTW, I'll play the triangle. I hope you can sing.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #88)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 07:49 AM

Whisp (23,770 posts)

120. Looks like List Making to me.










Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:50 AM

zappaman (11,770 posts)

90. What group is that Rick?







What group am I in?
Is there a "let's ignore their alerts" group as well as whatever group you are blathering about?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to zappaman (Reply #90)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:58 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

93. Have we ever spoken before?









Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 07:15 AM

PeaceNikki (21,150 posts)

117. Are you suggesting that there was a coordinated effort to alert on this one stupid, meta OP?







Or any? That's both wrong and fucking ridiculous. It was a disruptive meta post. I stand by that. Alone or with a fucking "group".


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #117)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:08 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

142. Apparently we have hosts who believe alerting is so beyond the pale that







The imagine it must be personal? A bit if projecting there!


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #142)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:10 AM

PeaceNikki (21,150 posts)

143. This place is a fucking joke. A few hosts are FREAKING THE FUCK OUT that they are being asked to







justify their decision, but completely ok with the fact that another LITERALLY said they should disregard the alerters.

I am really getting sick of one or two hosts treating non-(current GD)hosts like we're pieces of shit who should be ignored. Hey, newsflash, we're members of this community, too.




Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #142)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:12 AM

Violet_Crumble (32,238 posts)

144. I'm really not comfortable with GD hosts being attacked like this....







I don't think it's helpful at all...


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #144)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:13 AM

PeaceNikki (21,150 posts)

145. How about alerters being 'attacked', is that cool?









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #145)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:15 AM

Violet_Crumble (32,238 posts)

147. Even if they had been, that doesn't justify attacking GD hosts n/t









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #147)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:18 AM

PeaceNikki (21,150 posts)

148. She's not 'attacking', she's voicing anger about being "grouped" and dismissed.







Follow the subthread you're in.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #148)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:19 AM

Violet_Crumble (32,238 posts)

149. Both of you are attacking the hosts and making things much harder in here than they need to be n/t









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #147)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:19 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

150. The alerters were attacked and accused of nefarious BS...







And if discussing it reads as an attack on any one- maybe it's because that was an incredibly shitty and biased thing to say.

No reflection on anyone acting in good faith here.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Rhiannon12866 (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:52 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

23. Added it to the OP, thanks!









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #23)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:53 PM

Rhiannon12866 (61,576 posts)

25. No worries!







Slow evening... *fingers crossed*


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:50 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

22. Does anyone object to a lock, and if so, can you give a strong rationale why we should ignore SOP







not to mention Skinner's clear instructions and leave this thread open?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:52 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

24. You have two GDH that voted leave so you'd need to TB with them.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #24)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:54 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

27. I don't see any rationale for leaving this open.







Do you?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #27)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:55 PM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

28. As I said upthread I'm not going to vote on this one.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #28)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:57 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

30. I will politely ask all three leavers for their reasons.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #28)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:59 PM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

35. I have politely asked all three leavers for their reasons. nt









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #35)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:05 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

38. Wonderful.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #22)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:57 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

52. We dont have to get you to approve our reasons to leave. We are supposed to leave threads open







unless there is a CLEAR CONSENSUS TO LOCK. There is no such consensus. And dont let non-hosts "strongly encourage" you do lock something when there is not a consensus. You should not be locking threads unilaterally.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #52)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:02 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

56. Baloney. You should SHARE your reasons, but you all haven't.







You shouldn't be surprised that a Host's vote with no reasoning behind it has no sway. If you care so much about a particular vote, take the time and effort to share your reasoning. That's how the community of Hosts builds consensus, not by "phoned in", effortless votes.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #56)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:11 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

81. It isn't baloney by a long shot.







Group consensus is group consensus and when it is close, Skinner himself said to leave it.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #56)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 08:38 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

127. New rule? Made by who? Since when is that an issue?









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #22)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 05:23 AM

pacalo (23,252 posts)

112. NaGDH, but I saw a good point made in the OP.







I lurk more than post these days, but I felt strongly enough about the discussion to participate in it. So did many others. I can understand why some hosts would vote to leave it.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:53 PM

greyl (16,995 posts)

26. Am I wrong, or







did the 3 Leave voters not include an ounce of reasoning behind their vote?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #26)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:57 PM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

31. Nope, "the 3 Leave voters not include an ounce of reasoning behind their vote", again.









Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #31)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:00 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

36. If it were up to me, I'd ignore their votes







and let them work on gathering the required reasoning needed for their complaint to Admin to be sympathized with.

(Not a GD Host)


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:04 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

37. yeah, I know they think racism and sexist crap is not in their purview, but this is clearly a







violation. I guess Willie is special. This is just making GD worse, Grassswire posted some real RW crap and we have a thread of people treating her like Joan of Arc or a little lost lamb. Can't wait to see what they'll be emboldened to post next.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #37)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 05:45 AM

pacalo (23,252 posts)

114. Whoa, whoa, whoa. What does the OP have to do with "racism & sexist crap"?







Or to the post to which you were responding? That's coming from left-field, as though some prior hurts of yours are coming into play where they shouldn't be.

That's some commentary about grasswire where it doesn't belong, too. Your commitment to "no Meta threads" isn't looking very strong.

It's sad to see the hosts forum becoming an offshoot of the Meta forum.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to pacalo (Reply #114)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 09:51 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

137. It's about inconsistency.







What did I say about Grasswire other than she posted RW crap? She/ he did that.
No speculation why on my part.

I commented on those around her/ him acting as if getting a thread locked made them a martyr for getting a locked post- w/ RW crap. No one is a martyr here for having a locked post, it happens. And it should happen if it's dodgy RW bullshit. That is why you all got so many alerts. I'm sure the RW crap got juried for the same reason, because of where we are.



Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #37)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 08:05 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

125. What disgusting smears against Willy and Grasswire.







Grasswire apologized, had no idea it was a RW site, you should be ashamed of yourself.

"yeah, I know they think racism and sexist crap is not in their purview, but this is clearly a violation. I guess Willie is special. This is just making GD worse, Grassswire posted some real RW crap and we have a thread of people treating her like Joan of Arc or a little lost lamb. Can't wait to see what they'll be emboldened to post next".

That is a personal attack against two DUers by a so called host in a forum where neither of them have the opportunity to defend themselves against your vile bullshit.





Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Autumn (Reply #125)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 09:38 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

135. She did post RW crap, it's not a smear- it's reality.







Accidental or not- I didn't speculate. No insult there. It happened, was corrected and not the end of the world. I said the same thing to Grasswire's face. Know a bit about your sources. It's not hard.

Hosts speculating WHY many different DUers alerted are some kind of a group? That was a smear, unfounded, and shows bias against six good DUers. Do they not matter?

It is now clear that some hosts are looking at the people, and not the posts when deciding how to vote. They explain this here while avoiding discussion of the OP.
That explains a lot if the inconsistency here.

Poor Achshmid asking for other hosts to weigh in. They didn't realize that's only welcome theoretically.

I never did try and "vote", but said many times I thought it was a bad lock as handled. But it should have been a clear easy lock. It's pretty cut and dry.



Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #135)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 09:41 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

136. She didn't know, I wouldn't have known that was a RW site.







Talking trash about DUers in the host form is not cool. Look in a mirror lady you have been looking at the people for quite a while now when you want a post locked.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Autumn (Reply #136)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 09:55 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

138. Untrue. I am completely unfamiliar with Grass and never speculated- but clearly their post was a







Problem. That's not talking trash- it's exactly what hosts are supposed to be discussing- instead of talking trash about the alerters. Group my ass.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #138)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 09:56 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

139. She apologized but that's not good enough for you. We discuss alerted posts, not the posters.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Autumn (Reply #139)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:02 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

140. A lock is good enough for RW crap, and I hold no animus toward them.







But you seem okay with trashing the alerters as was done here. No comment on that bit of bias?


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #140)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:07 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

141. Then there should be a list of acceptable sites. Y'all ought to get right on that.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Autumn (Reply #141)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 10:14 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

146. News busters has an anti- liberal subheading under the name...







You can look at the "editors picks" to get a feel for it where a place is at, editorially.
It's a good lesson for Grasswire, anyway.

Are you really thinking any old RW crap should stay if it's an accident or was posted by someone the hosts like and want to protect? That seems to be the message I'm getting. After all this, I have no idea why anyone would leave that crap in GD. None.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:37 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

42. GDH - So you are not a GD Host and you are pushing a host to ignore other host's votes.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #42)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:04 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

58. That fact that you are pulling rank instead of offering reasoning,







leads me to believe you are occupying space in a Host slot rather than using it as it was intended.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #58)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:06 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

59. If claiming that non-hosts dont have a vote is "pulling rank" then I am guilty. I resent your







pressure to try to get me to see things your way.

I voted to leave and I dont owe you an explanation.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #59)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:13 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

63. Nobody is arguing that non-GD Hosts have a vote.







You are arguing that the opinion of non-GD Hosts offered here in this decision making discussion should be ignored.

I say good luck trying to get people to ignore good reasoning from other DU Hosts.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #63)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:19 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

65. I didn't try and vote, we just discussed our opinions calmly. for this I am accused of being part of







some group or another. LOL. Ridiculous.



" I try to lock those threads that violate the SOP, period. If one gets left inappropriately, we cant just let the retaliatory OP stand if it violates the SOP. " -


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #65)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:26 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

68. I've just lost my patience with Hosts who think all they're supposed to do is vote, not think.







When Hosting on DU3 was new, it was different. But after seeing a pattern of Hosts voting Leave while offering little reason for doing so, and when at least one of them goes so far as to say they'll usually vote Leave regardless of whether the Post violates the SOP, I think it's impossible for other Hosts not to learn from that and adjust their adjudicating appropriately.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #68)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:32 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

71. yeah, as one said- we usually leave everything, so why not leave everything, LOL.







And that's the best reason they have for this crap? It's pretty funny.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #71)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:50 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

73. You should sign up for GD if you feel you could make a positive impact.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #73)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:57 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

75. not sure how one could these days- with fellow hosts accusing others of bias, yet offering no







rationale for their decisions of allow the SOP to be explictly violated. I hosted before, and it was different. I think they'll always be one head poppin gin with a "leave!!- no consensus possible", now that people realize that is a thing they can do. Always had hosts who did not want to enforce the SOP, but they used to be expected to explain why.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #75)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:06 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

79. He busted a thread that had no concensus







And went off on his own to lock it. That's bullshit.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #79)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:14 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

82. I don't agree with that, nor do I agree on voting to totally disregard the SOP w/ no explaination







The thread was pretty clearly whining about DU, which is just about the only thing that actually does get locked around here, these days.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #82)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:28 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

86. You don't go off on your own







and lock a thread without consensus, and it was not established.

Good bad or indifferent, rules are in place for a reason.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #86)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:31 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

87. I already agreed with that?







But, rules are completely different for some posters than others, and it has always been that way to some extent.
I remember the first day I hosted, someone said they always ignore X persons alerts. And someone else said, oh they alwys have broken that rule, so we can't enforce it. It was terribly confusing!


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #58)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 05:05 AM

pacalo (23,252 posts)

110. "Pulling rank" belongs to the host who locked without consensus.







Skinner has stated that the hosts are, in effect, free to use their own judgment. Like the jury system, you get the luck of the draw in the different mindsets who serve as a team at any given phase DU is going through at the time.

You sound angry, to be frank.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 04:43 AM

pacalo (23,252 posts)

109. NaGDH: The hosts who voted to leave aren't the ones who need to address ATA.







The ones who are not able to get past opposing hosting opinions are the ones complaining here. There was no consensus to lock this thread.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #26)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 09:17 AM

Bobbie Jo (9,525 posts)

134. Well, one did







http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1243&pid=89569

I suspect this is why others didn't feel the to explain.

Seems pretty clear to me, apparently the wrong "group" alerted.

Nope, no bias at work here. Totally above board and a good faith effort.

The inadvertent honesty is kinda interesting, no?



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Sun Jun 1, 2014, 11:57 PM

itsrobert (10,393 posts)

29. GDH - Lock







Meta - Whining about DU


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:08 AM

ucrdem (3,825 posts)

39. It is locked.







Here is the lock message:

Locking. Complaining about jury decisions violates the GD Statement of Purpose.

It's one of only a few things that does:


Statement of Purpose: Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.


Thanks for understanding.
...........................................................
Agschmid, I recommend that you self-delete the OP. I will take full responsibility for this decision. Complaints should be made in ATA. Thanks all and good night.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #39)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:10 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

40. I'll leave it open, thanks for the recommendation but I imagine...







there will be some further discussion here.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #40)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:12 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

41. Good Leave. nt









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #39)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:39 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

43. GDH - I am respectfully requesting that you unlock this. Remember those here that







are not GD Hosts DONT GET TO VOTE. I am a strong leave. You and the non-hosts dont get to decide if my Leave is worthy.

Please unlock this now.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #43)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:42 AM

Violet_Crumble (32,238 posts)

45. I'm just popping in with a lock vote and a question







I thought whining about hidden posts was something skinner had told us we should be locking. So why wouldn't this one fall into that category?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #45)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:11 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

62. I dont see this as whining. Sometimes we dont all agree, but some here cant handle that.







I am not referring to you Violet.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #62)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:56 AM

Violet_Crumble (32,238 posts)

74. That's fair enough. Fwiw I don't see it as disruptive meta







Not like the ones where someone calls for the nuking of another DUer. I'm not going to die in a ditch over it so I'm changing my vote to WSC.......


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #43)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:03 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

77. It's a leave







he just hauled off and locked it.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #39)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:43 AM

Hassin Bin Sober (10,894 posts)

46. You need to unlock this. You had no consensus.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #46)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:46 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

48. Yup.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #46)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:04 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

78. Exactly.







I have no idea who he thinks he that he can just swing in and lock threads without consensus, but that was a horrible lock. He needs to get kicked.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #46)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 05:13 AM

pacalo (23,252 posts)

111. Agree.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to ucrdem (Reply #39)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:02 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

76. You locked without consensus







That is a no no.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:50 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

49. GDH - I see a vote of three Leaves and two locks. There is no consensus to lock. This is crazy.







Non-hosts are in here telling a host what to do. No one appointed ucrdem as the decider. He does not have the power to review other hosts reasons for their votes and decide whether they are valid or not.

Of course there are a bunch of alerts. They are all in the same "Group".



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:54 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

51. I could honestly care less who the alerters are... this lock was without any consensus from GDH.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #51)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:59 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

54. I only mentioned it because the number of alerters was being used as a reason to lock. It's not a







popularity contest. The non-hosts dont get to vote.

I agree that this was locked without a clear consensus.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #54)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:10 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

60. It's not a popularity contest- but you've given no one any reason to allow the SOP to be ignored







no one has. What is up with that?




Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #60)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:17 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

64. Is that a required portion of our job?









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #64)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:22 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

66. I think if you want to leave something that CLEARLY violates the SOP, you owe your fellow hosts the







courtesy of why you want to make a special exemption for this violation.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #66)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:25 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

67. In this case I didn't actually vote, as I stated multiple times.







So no special exemption from me, I just am unhappy with how the lock happened. There were 3-ish leave votes and to me that does not mean we had arrived at consensus.

Anyways not going to beat a dead horse here. Hopefully this gets re-visited by the locking host, goodnight.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #67)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:30 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

69. I understand totally. Sad you invited other hosts opinions only to have us insulted and accused of







pushing anyone to do anything. You can't express an opinion these days without some pretending it's abusive or totolitarinism, LOL.
That no one could provide a rationale, is an interesting point.

(It was a those three you, and not a you you. - And NONE of it is personal)


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #69)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:31 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

70. Well they still might, who knows there is always tomorrow.







Reason or not I feel their voices were important.

Thanks, goodnight.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #54)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:07 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

80. It isn't a popularity contest







but some people want to make it one, and it is plain stupid to allow it to continue.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #80)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:22 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

84. It is about Willie being popular, yep. And maybe about people just hating any rules here at all.










Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #84)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:49 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

89. Locking a thread







without consensus is against the rules. Is that how you define "hating the rules"? Because I define them that way.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #89)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:54 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

91. I already agreed with you in that so many times, I moved on to discuss other rules







And how they don't see to apply to some posters, or matter to some hosts.

Not exactly a secret, and it appears it's always been that way.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #91)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:08 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

96. I didn't mean to run it into the ground







I do agree with you that it doesn't seem to apply to certain posters.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #96)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:18 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

99. I'm shocked I'm apparently in a group now?







What bullshit. Really embarrassing revelation about the "thinking" that goes on here.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to bettyellen (Reply #99)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:21 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

101. ?







I am clueless as to this response. Are you sure it was intended for me ?


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #101)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:24 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

102. I thought you'd have seen post 44. Apparently some DUers are better than others







According to hosts here.

Like I said, there have always been biased hosts.


Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:59 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

53. Some reasoning is persuasive.







Zero reasoning is not.

Zero reasoning is what the Leave votes offered.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #53)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:01 AM

Agschmid (8,333 posts)

55. Are they even here right now?







If there is mixed consensus is it the right thing to do to lock a thread and then walk away? It's 1:01AM EST potentially the leave votes are in bed, I don't see any reason this had to be a rushed lock which is what it turned out to be.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #55)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:36 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

72. Half are here, counting you.







How long to wait for all the Leave votes to reply with some reasoning and rebuttal to all the Lock reasons given in the Alerts and Host replies here is a judgement call with a very fuzzy target.

I do think it may have bought some more time if the first objectors here to the Lock offered good reasons for Leaving it.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Reply #55)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 08:26 AM

Autumn (16,209 posts)

126. It was my Son in Laws birthday BBQ. I looked in a few times and saw this one and said I was a leave.







as I did on the taterguy alert. I was unaware we had new administrators who are making the rules now.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to greyl (Reply #53)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:03 AM

rhett o rick (36,391 posts)

57. I certainly agree that reasoning is persuasive. But there is no requirement for hosts to justify







their votes. Posts are to be left open unless there is a clear consensus to lock. If three host vote to leave, that's enough to indicate that there is not a clear consensus. To pretend that our votes dont count because you dont like our reasoning is crap. I was at dinner when ucrdem unilaterally decided to lock, based on pressure from non-hosts. That's bullcrap.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #57)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 01:10 AM

greyl (16,995 posts)

61. I said "some" reasoning,







implying that there is other reasoning that is not persuasive. I didn't mean to say "an amount of" reasoning is persuasive, because some reasoning out there is lousy. Just because it's offered as reasoning, doesn't mean it's worth a damn, iow.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to rhett o rick (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 05:35 AM

pacalo (23,252 posts)

113. Your post here is what moved me to join in on this thread to give it some balance.








Non-hosts are in here telling a host what to do.


I'm a non-host who believes there was no consensus to lock this OP.



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Agschmid (Original post)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:26 AM

Behind the Aegis (32,910 posts)

85. This is fucking absurd!







On Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:00 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Locking. Complaining about jury decisions violates the GD Statement of Purpose.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5036606

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Abuse of host privileges, he did not get consensus.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:11 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: We're in for a rough ride
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Good God Almighty, am I glad my GD hosting tour is over. - Lasher
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is one of the most pathetic uses of the alert system ever! If he is seen as abusing his hosting duties, take it up with Skinner, and for the record, your host privileges should also be revoked!
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: An alert sent on a host's locking post???

This place is now officially nuts.

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


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I stick by my comments (#5)!


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #85)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 02:55 AM

bettyellen (24,490 posts)

92. OMG! Hilarious.









Self-delete Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #85)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:04 AM

Aerows (24,499 posts)

95. My word







we have entered a new era. We alert on alerts about alerts


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Aerows (Reply #95)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:41 AM

LeftishBrit (32,265 posts)

104. Meta-alerting! Or perhaps meta-meta-meta-alerting.









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link herePermalink


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #85)

Aerows This message was self-deleted by its author.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #85)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 03:40 AM

LeftishBrit (32,265 posts)

103. Good lord, this is ridiculous!









Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link

Recommendations

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

But it's just performance art! And besides, Ann Coulter and the Cheneys are bad. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #1
Imagine the uproar if a right leaning 840high Jun 2014 #166
Imagine the uproar if a right leaning pundit said LuvNewcastle Jun 2014 #238
Or you could not read his writings. Throd Jun 2014 #2
*sigh* He's the "RUDE" pundit. NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #3
Rude need not be sexist or homophobic. That's bigotry. boston bean Jun 2014 #5
Oh for petes sake NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #18
Did I call the rude pundit a homophobe? boston bean Jun 2014 #20
One would gather that based on the wording of post #5. NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #29
possibly inartfully worded and easily misinterpreted. boston bean Jun 2014 #32
Unfortunately, he's stuck writing in English... NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #46
I don't believe he is either. However, I don't think boston bean Jun 2014 #48
Honestly, NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #57
There aren't any other words that were once common usage that are boston bean Jun 2014 #60
That actually was my point. NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #72
He is not a bigot but he uses bigotry in the form of sexist/homophobic terms and stereotypes. boston bean Jun 2014 #83
I understand your point. NutmegYankee Jun 2014 #104
Indeed, you and boston bean just restored my faith in DU arcane1 Jun 2014 #113
Appreciate the polite and meaningful conversation. boston bean Jun 2014 #123
Let the Man Speak tea and oranges Jun 2014 #125
The right is the party of bigotry. boston bean Jun 2014 #127
It just hit me that what you're offering is a literary critique! tea and oranges Jun 2014 #138
"Unfortunately, he's stuck writing in English" LuvNewcastle Jun 2014 #240
If you are offended, then trash the threads. Plez dont try to censor what we read. nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #201
Yup... MrMickeysMom Jun 2014 #355
No one forces you to read the RP. HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #308
no one forces you to read boston bean's posts. Scout Jun 2014 #328
But I'm not trying to hide their post... HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #334
That's cute, but where do you stand? You favor a small few determining what the rest of us rhett o rick Jun 2014 #358
My bad. I forgot about the "asshole and proud if it" exception to homophobic language. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #7
Did you ever see this one?? It's pretty bad! boston bean Jun 2014 #14
Self-righteous indignation is often over blown. You can ignore posters and/or trash threads. nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #202
as can you. Scout Jun 2014 #330
He's not hiding from anyone. mmm413 Jun 2014 #111
Then ignore him nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #4
Agreed. William769 Jun 2014 #6
Or he could just write what he wants quinnox Jun 2014 #8
Sure he can. I can to, and I can come to my own conclusions, and I can speak to boston bean Jun 2014 #9
And as we know, freedom of speech is freedom from feedback. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #11
I'm pretty sure that The Rude Pundit is familiar with the nature of feedback. Orrex Jun 2014 #132
Oh, I've no doubt he does. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #143
LOL! Orrex Jun 2014 #150
... NuclearDem Jun 2014 #169
"Free country"? Why are you using the Duck Dynasty fans' argument? alp227 Jun 2014 #266
I think people need to stop going overboard with what they consider sexist and homophobic. phleshdef Jun 2014 #10
Let him know. In no time at all he can be as widely read and popular as you are. 11 Bravo Jun 2014 #12
He can do what he likes. boston bean Jun 2014 #16
So can you. Warpy Jun 2014 #99
Another bringing this to the personal, like the only reason for posting was boston bean Jun 2014 #109
"One" is general. Warpy Jun 2014 #110
Okay, you find words offensive, but I think you are missing the whole point of some of RP rants Hestia Jun 2014 #251
Do you have a list of books for us to burn. bahrbearian Jun 2014 #13
No, I don't.... sorry to disappoint. boston bean Jun 2014 #15
Post removed Post removed Jun 2014 #224
lol CatWoman Jun 2014 #17
Minitrue says rudepundit doubleplusungood. Does thoughtcrime. Make unperson. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #21
Awesome! Puzzledtraveller Jun 2014 #192
+1 scarletwoman Jun 2014 #33
Really? You think I'm in favor of burning books? boston bean Jun 2014 #52
What I got out of your OP is that you're clearly in favor of controlling what other people write and scarletwoman Jun 2014 #56
+100! n/t zappaman Jun 2014 #59
OMG, I vehemently disagree with you. I guess we have to break up bettyellen Jun 2014 #249
Dammit! zappaman Jun 2014 #269
I'm already itching for a reunion! I just can't quit you, 23, Nikki or Cooley- who doesn't bettyellen Jun 2014 #298
If one of the wonderful GD hosts who put our group together zappaman Jun 2014 #299
now I have hosts lying and saying no one judged us to be an "infamous group" bettyellen Jun 2014 #325
Excellant analogy, I agree 100%. giftedgirl77 Jun 2014 #62
I am critical of his writing. Hell, if I can't say that, what the hell can I say? boston bean Jun 2014 #63
No, you want him to CHANGE his writing. There's a difference. scarletwoman Jun 2014 #78
+1000 nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #81
My suggestion of not using bigotry in his rants is akin to book burning? boston bean Jun 2014 #87
If the Rude Pundit is reading this thread I strongly urge him to totally ignore your "suggestions", scarletwoman Jun 2014 #98
Lee has a clearly stated "doesn't give a shit" policy on his blog. riqster Jun 2014 #259
Damn! NuclearDem Jun 2014 #66
Please see my post #25: scarletwoman Jun 2014 #85
Yeah, and what I see is tantamount to "SHUTUP, you can't tell other people what to do" NuclearDem Jun 2014 #120
What I saw was had-it-up-to-here anger, which I completely understand. pacalo Jun 2014 #187
boston bean has an opinion, fer gawd's sake! That doesn't make her a book CTyankee Jun 2014 #211
I'd give you my uncensored opinion about what you just wrote pacalo Jun 2014 #212
I am sorry if I have upset you. CTyankee Jun 2014 #213
As good as you're feeling? pacalo Jun 2014 #214
again, sorry... CTyankee Jun 2014 #216
I don't take offense as easily as some do. pacalo Jun 2014 #219
have a good night... CTyankee Jun 2014 #225
Same to you. pacalo Jun 2014 #226
Me too! Go Scarlet, we gotcha back :) Hestia Jun 2014 #252
Right on bahrbearian Jun 2014 #115
I can see how they came to that conclusion. nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #204
+1000 nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #42
+, um, 451? SMC22307 Jun 2014 #51
LOL bahrbearian Jun 2014 #73
apparently you'd like to burn this thread. why is it that "free speech" only goes one way? nt TheFrenchRazor Jun 2014 #331
I think your hair is on fire. Squinch Jun 2014 #351
better still, people who are offended by the Rude Pundit could just steer clear.. frylock Jun 2014 #19
Why are people trying to limit what other people should or should not read? boston bean Jun 2014 #22
really?! you ask that in a thread you started advising the Rude Pundit to limit what he writes? frylock Jun 2014 #24
LOL. You think I used it to make a sexist joke? You think I used it to attack another woman? boston bean Jun 2014 #28
Oh. My. Gawd. Exactly. Context is everything... nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #35
Yeah it is. What context is it ok to call a woman a "c*nt" boston bean Jun 2014 #45
If you don't get the RP's "context" (rude sarcasm) then ignore him riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #65
I am not the PC Police, nor am I trying to censor him. boston bean Jun 2014 #68
It seems that you are asking him to self-censor. riqster Jun 2014 #260
Post removed Post removed Jun 2014 #198
Seriously I laughed out loud when I read this. Puglover Jun 2014 #244
Aren't you trying to limit what other people should or should not read? cyberswede Jun 2014 #76
No, I'm not trying to limit what other people should read or not read? boston bean Jun 2014 #77
Well, in my case, I enjoy his diatribes *despite* the offensive terms I don't like. cyberswede Jun 2014 #91
I made a suggestion. Thought it was worth a try? boston bean Jun 2014 #100
I don't really think he's normalizing homophobic/sexist stereotypes. cyberswede Jun 2014 #130
I don't think he is a homophobic or a sexist either. boston bean Jun 2014 #135
No, I don't think they would... cyberswede Jun 2014 #151
He is using bigotry to buttress political points and in essence boston bean Jun 2014 #155
I don't mind agreeing to disagree. cyberswede Jun 2014 #162
The administrators gave you the ignore tools to use. No excuses. pacalo Jun 2014 #188
they also gave alerts and juries and hosts to deal with them. the hosts appear to be so paralyzed bettyellen Jun 2014 #285
Why would anyone who knows what to expect from the Rude Pundit pacalo Jun 2014 #307
So, you don't want to answer me @ standards here, instead dredge up old bullshit. bettyellen Jun 2014 #311
Any time the tables are turned on a select few, such as yourself, it's "dredging up old bullshit". pacalo Jun 2014 #319
Du is the victim when hosts freely admit they judge DUers INSTEAD of the content here- and other bettyellen Jun 2014 #320
What a fairy tale you are spinning! pacalo Jun 2014 #324
Since you accused me of lying- here you go- the ugly truth about the hosts forum: bettyellen Jun 2014 #326
How about including the post where you insulted two DUers by name? pacalo Jun 2014 #340
you brought it up, and accused me of lying about it. I did not insult anyone- I said other people bettyellen Jun 2014 #342
"All of the alerters are in the same Group." zappaman Jun 2014 #350
yeah, it makes DU suck that some hosts are so vindictive and openly hostile towards alerters bettyellen Jun 2014 #356
But then there would be one less thing to get upset about. Nobel_Twaddle_III Jun 2014 #67
Better still, they can alert on the specific post Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #309
why doesn't RP just steer clear of people he doesn't like? double standard, no? nt TheFrenchRazor Jun 2014 #335
well you can't argue with the logic like that frylock Jun 2014 #339
For those in this thread who are defending his use of the c word dsc Jun 2014 #23
Yes. It's all in the context. mwooldri Jun 2014 #71
I am willing to bet he did no such thing dsc Jun 2014 #74
Exactly. nt redqueen Jun 2014 #86
You are correct - he hasn't. Yet. mwooldri Jun 2014 #89
Yes, he has used the n-word. Here is a link. Also used the s word for latinos and k word for Jews stevenleser Jun 2014 #168
Again: This is a dishonest comparison. redqueen Jun 2014 #253
Again, no it's not and you are moving the goalposts. stevenleser Jun 2014 #254
LOL. redqueen Jun 2014 #255
it's pretty clear that those people *would* use the n-word if they thought they could get away TheFrenchRazor Jun 2014 #337
Maybe people who can't deal with Rude Pundit's writing style ought to just steer clear of him. scarletwoman Jun 2014 #25
This message was self-deleted by its author redqueen Jun 2014 #93
Doesn't everything you wrote in this post apply equally to your reaction to the OP? Squinch Jun 2014 #105
Here's the difference, in case it's too subtle for you see it on its face. scarletwoman Jun 2014 #124
You do not want the Rude Pundit to change, and you are saying so. She DOES want the Rude Pundit to Squinch Jun 2014 #129
"Castigating"? No, I'm OPPOSING her opinion. scarletwoman Jun 2014 #144
Castigating doesn't mean victimizing. Castigating means criticizing. No one said you were Squinch Jun 2014 #158
So, you're saying boston bean ought to avoid doing something? NuclearDem Jun 2014 #134
Boston Bean is entitled to express any point of view she likes... The Road Runner Jun 2014 #147
The OP wants posts written to her satisfaction, so it's just as important that others pacalo Jun 2014 #182
Goodness! chervilant Jun 2014 #173
+1 Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2014 #228
Applause! pacalo Jun 2014 #189
Yes. BootinUp Jun 2014 #229
I never read RP nor any of the 'I'm a ranting maniac' types. When someone declares that being a Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #26
Are you meaning that writing a post about this boston bean Jun 2014 #37
No of course not, I know you'd agree. Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #95
Yeah but somehow the Mildly Impolite Pundit would not have the same impact tularetom Jun 2014 #27
Rude requires sexism and homophobia? Never knew....... boston bean Jun 2014 #30
LOL !!! + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! WillyT Jun 2014 #31
Maybe because "rude" doesn't have to fucking include bigoted shit. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #34
maybe he should be arrested and charged for obscenity like Lenny Bruce frylock Jun 2014 #41
Right, because a couple people posting on a message board NuclearDem Jun 2014 #49
i'm sorry. i thought we were discussing censorship here. frylock Jun 2014 #133
Sure, censorship like maybe agreeing with the suggestion NuclearDem Jun 2014 #142
Advocating self-censorship is censorship. riqster Jun 2014 #261
"Advocating self-censorship is censorship" WTF????? No. Really. It isn't. Squinch Jun 2014 #346
Yes, it is. riqster Jun 2014 #353
Wow. That's insane. And wicked silly, too. Squinch Jun 2014 #354
You do realize he teaches English and Creative Writing, right? Oilwellian Jun 2014 #178
Good point. pacalo Jun 2014 #193
A class well worth avoiding whistler162 Jun 2014 #236
No but you shat on anyone who peruses 4chan and teenagers tkmorris Jun 2014 #209
If you've perused 4chan at any point, you know exactly why I despise them. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #210
Wow, you really don't get it do you? truebrit71 Jun 2014 #272
No, I perfectly get that there's a horde of big pearl clutching babies NuclearDem Jun 2014 #278
Don't want to be offended, don't fucking read it. truebrit71 Jun 2014 #280
You clearly don't get it. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #288
The funny thing is, I thought this particular piece was not anywhere close to his strongest stuff... truebrit71 Jun 2014 #294
The jury results are in: In_The_Wind Jun 2014 #283
Thanks for posting the results. No comment. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #292
excellent! + a fucking gazillion n/t Scout Jun 2014 #327
so if you just admit that you're an a-hole, then it's ok? who knew? nt TheFrenchRazor Jun 2014 #338
I love when people tell others what words to use, and use the verboten words in their complaint NightWatcher Jun 2014 #36
Are you meaning I shouldn't have written this post? boston bean Jun 2014 #38
I'll type this real slow for you. You complain about sexist terms, yet you used them NightWatcher Jun 2014 #47
Ridiculous, not much more to say about it than that. boston bean Jun 2014 #50
My favorite part is how Rude's fans can't handle even mild criticism aimed at him NuclearDem Jun 2014 #43
criticize all you like, just don't try to control language NightWatcher Jun 2014 #54
It was a suggestion, not an attempt to control. boston bean Jun 2014 #55
Nah....you got what you wanted ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2014 #88
What is "Nah" in response to? boston bean Jun 2014 #94
Nah meaning I don't buy your supposed shock at the responses ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2014 #101
Suggesting alternatives and providing feedback isn't "controlling language." NuclearDem Jun 2014 #58
Mildly criticized? Uhm how about hidden? riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #80
A hide isn't a crime against humanity. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #107
Can't the same be said about you and your reaction to this OP? If you don't like it, don't read it, Squinch Jun 2014 #116
yawn, thanks for playing NightWatcher Jun 2014 #122
Translation: "Yes. I am doing exactly what I am telling the OP not to do." Squinch Jun 2014 #126
If the OP put a "Let's impose censorship" label on her post, sure. jeff47 Jun 2014 #265
But it's all part of the shtick! No one would listen to him, otherwise! Brickbat Jun 2014 #39
It's a stale and lame shtick. Got old for me long ago. Ikonoklast Jun 2014 #97
But if he can't be sexist and homophobic, then he's not rude! Brickbat Jun 2014 #108
We're sending troops to Iraq again. How many more threads about a blog post will there be? LeftyMom Jun 2014 #40
yep, and there's your fucking context right there frylock Jun 2014 #44
I thought for sure you would be against a post like that. boston bean Jun 2014 #61
you started a FUCKING thread advising a blogger to watch what he wrote.. frylock Jun 2014 #137
I know, I committed the crime of suggesting that the liberal Rude Pundit boston bean Jun 2014 #140
Maybe you should start a thread pintobean Jun 2014 #69
Judging by the number of responses, people seem to view this as quite important... The Road Runner Jun 2014 #159
Very true. In the marketplace of ideas, this thread seems to have a good bit of value. riqster Jun 2014 #264
Stupid thread is stupid. eom MohRokTah Jun 2014 #53
One comment about age and people go berserk BainsBane Jun 2014 #64
At least RP didn't really cross the line by addressing white privilege or something. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #70
Maybe we ought to take this to some group on DU? boston bean Jun 2014 #75
I think the Rude Pundit frequently makes fun of old white men... cyberswede Jun 2014 #79
He attacks politicians BainsBane Jun 2014 #119
I don't disagree about the c-word, but cyberswede Jun 2014 #141
I haven't read much by him BainsBane Jun 2014 #290
He also uses the N word for African Americans, S word for Latinos and K word for Jews stevenleser Jun 2014 #175
I don't really care to read that BainsBane Jun 2014 #195
No need for you to, but the suggestion that he only picks on two groups is not valid. nt stevenleser Jun 2014 #245
That wasn't my point BainsBane Jun 2014 #246
Sure it was. You claim slurs against two groups is accepted, but vs another it isnt. stevenleser Jun 2014 #247
Amazing, is it not? "I didn't say what I said, and stop saying that I said it!" 11 Bravo Jun 2014 #287
You need a new hobby BainsBane Jun 2014 #295
My point was about the reaction by people here. BainsBane Jun 2014 #293
When TRP uses racist slurs, he uses them to demonstrate what hateful stupid rightwingers think. redqueen Jun 2014 #297
No, people need to know he is rude, vulgar, and coarse. mwooldri Jun 2014 #82
Please do read this nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #84
Did I appear angry to you? Point to my anger, please. boston bean Jun 2014 #90
I just pointed out that if he displeases you so much nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #92
You never write about something you want to write about, and are possibly in disagreement with? boston bean Jun 2014 #96
And.... nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #102
The First Amendment cuts both ways. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #128
My advise, given the nature of the beast nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #152
You are also free to ignore Boston Bean's thread... The Road Runner Jun 2014 #163
Better than that, I am putting her on permanent ignore nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #164
Whether you ignore me is up to you. The Road Runner Jun 2014 #171
Actually I prefer to let folks know nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #174
Thank you - as a woman, who does NOT speak for all women, I do not get my thong in a bunch Hestia Jun 2014 #256
Did someone tell you that you should be offended because she is offended? Because that was nowhere Squinch Jun 2014 #347
It's pathetic how many here apparently can't differentiate rudeness/vulgarity from bigotry. redqueen Jun 2014 #103
Well, I can tell the difference. cyberswede Jun 2014 #157
Yes, we really should destroy them over a stupid pun. jeff47 Jun 2014 #267
Apparently you find BB's suggestion worse than people using slurs like "pansies". redqueen Jun 2014 #274
The problem is the suggestion, not the claim that it's bigotry. jeff47 Jun 2014 #276
Yeah. Like I said: I have a bigger problem with bigoted insults than suggestions. nt redqueen Jun 2014 #281
The Rude Pundit is a national treasure. mmm413 Jun 2014 #106
As much an American treasure as Andrew Dice Clay! whistler162 Jun 2014 #300
I think the Rude Pundit should keep writing exactly as he has been and not change one bit. NYC Liberal Jun 2014 #112
How about we try avoiding Conservative Cave and Discussionist stereotypes of DU? Paladin Jun 2014 #114
But then, he wouldn't be rude nikto Jun 2014 #117
Obviously you have never listened to Don Rickles. whistler162 Jun 2014 #237
This is how I remember Don Rickles... nikto Jun 2014 #359
I like him, I read him MFM008 Jun 2014 #118
I assume you would continue to read if he left out the sexist/homophobic comments boston bean Jun 2014 #121
Amen. Sometimes the truth is edgy. But it remains truth. marble falls Jun 2014 #136
But it's not "the truth" that is edgy about his rants. The Road Runner Jun 2014 #165
The way he presents the truth is edgy. Sometimes its what it takes to get people to wake up .... marble falls Jun 2014 #185
So did you alert on meegbear's op? Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #131
I didn't alert and I was not on a jury. boston bean Jun 2014 #139
So you think it should have been alerted on, but it is out of bounds to ask if you alerted Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #145
WTF, I did not alert, that is why I said I didn't. I wasn't on the jury boston bean Jun 2014 #148
I did read what you wrote and I am still confused. Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #234
I support the hiding of the thread in that the DU community hid it. boston bean Jun 2014 #241
well that cleared up nothing. Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #242
Agreed. Union Scribe Jun 2014 #146
Fuck that shit Stryder Jun 2014 #149
Are you familiar with the term: RANT? DeSwiss Jun 2014 #153
Free speech applies all around. She expressed an opinion. She hasn't censored anyone. Squinch Jun 2014 #167
Then what's the point in saying anything at all.... DeSwiss Jun 2014 #183
She didn't alert on it and she wasn't on the jury. She stated an opinion, and she did so very Squinch Jun 2014 #184
I never said she did. DeSwiss Jun 2014 #186
Freedom of speech should apply even if you don't agree with the speech. Squinch Jun 2014 #191
It does apply when one doesn't agree with the speech -- that's my whole point. DeSwiss Jun 2014 #206
Freedom of expression absolutely DOES include the right to complain about how Squinch Jun 2014 #233
''I speak therefore you shouldn't.'' DeSwiss Jun 2014 #282
Your reply has absolutely nothing to do with anything I wrote. Maybe if you read it again, because Squinch Jun 2014 #345
Bingo. When one encounters something they don't like LittleBlue Jun 2014 #190
Are you in this thread because you like what the OP said? Squinch Jun 2014 #194
Right here LittleBlue Jun 2014 #197
Saying "ought to" is tantamount to the use of force? That's completely absurd. Squinch Jun 2014 #235
Interesting you bring up homophobic terms... opiate69 Jun 2014 #154
Well, I've never heard it before, and I didn't notice or see that in the post. boston bean Jun 2014 #161
Seriously?? opiate69 Jun 2014 #218
yeah, fucking seriously. I've never heard the term prior. boston bean Jun 2014 #239
LOL ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2014 #357
Not one person in that thread spoke out -- or alerted. The hypocrisy & double standards pacalo Jun 2014 #196
Seems a clear-cut case of "selective outrage" to me... opiate69 Jun 2014 #215
We can see right through them. pacalo Jun 2014 #217
Yup.. and I'm forever amazed that some seem incapable of it. opiate69 Jun 2014 #222
Considering you and your pal are the ones who saw the post BainsBane Jun 2014 #302
It's not like I was a participant in the thread, immersed in its development enough to have pacalo Jun 2014 #312
I only saw it when Opiate linked to it. BainsBane Jun 2014 #323
I don't spend my time on DU to scour the site for something to alert on. pacalo Jun 2014 #336
You waited for a second response to mention the sock BainsBane Jun 2014 #343
It was in your thread pintobean Jun 2014 #318
Good catch very telling bahrbearian Jun 2014 #227
Ah, another one with antedelluvian bookmarks BainsBane Jun 2014 #296
You were the one who saw the post BainsBane Jun 2014 #303
Maybe you actually need to read The Rude Pundit. madinmaryland Jun 2014 #156
Thank you. k/r 840high Jun 2014 #160
So many people seem think that we are criticizing that post just because of "bad language", or ... dawg Jun 2014 #170
OMG this is fucking ridiculous. This SUCKS! Can I use the word SUCKS? BootinUp Jun 2014 #176
You seem really invested in your right ... dawg Jun 2014 #177
SO then. You are not saying I AM homophobic. The Rude one is NOT really homophobic BootinUp Jun 2014 #179
No, that's the jury system. dawg Jun 2014 #180
The notion that its a homophobic slur is utterly fucking ridiculous. phleshdef Jun 2014 #199
Bravo! scarletwoman Jun 2014 #203
Word.... giftedgirl77 Jun 2014 #208
I got a hard on BootinUp Jun 2014 #220
Nailed it. nt Old and In the Way Jun 2014 #286
What, specifically, makes it homophobic? jeff47 Jun 2014 #268
...or not, because his name is, you know, THE RUDE PUNDIT... truebrit71 Jun 2014 #172
And its a frigging character, an act. As a true brit, I am sure you will appreciate this... stevenleser Jun 2014 #181
Yes, as a good liberal why dont you write a list of what he can and cannot say? nm rhett o rick Jun 2014 #200
+1,000. scarletwoman Jun 2014 #205
OK so you don't want to be no rude boy tularetom Jun 2014 #207
If he offends your sensibilities, don't read him. HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #221
FU RP mrsadm Jun 2014 #223
Or, in the alternative ... NanceGreggs Jun 2014 #230
I'll copy and paste my response on the "appreciation" thread KitSileya Jun 2014 #231
Personally ann--- Jun 2014 #232
Perfectly reasonable way of dealing with the issue. Nt riqster Jun 2014 #273
Ah, DU's censors are hard at work telling people to stop saying bad words. backscatter712 Jun 2014 #243
Are you scolding the OP? It really sounds like you are. Squinch Jun 2014 #348
Controversy sells. I think that is why he does it the way he does. Rex Jun 2014 #248
Is this a SJW thread? snooper2 Jun 2014 #250
Do you believe bigotry is wrong? nt alp227 Jun 2014 #262
It is against the rules of the Intertubes to answer a question with a question snooper2 Jun 2014 #275
Dumbest post ever Egnever Jun 2014 #257
I rarely disagree with you, but I will in this case. riqster Jun 2014 #258
yeah, also he is not god, occasionally he'll say thinks that are far too 'rude' for a website that La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #263
Because, you know...book burning, or some shit. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #271
they seem to be the most delicate flowers in the DU bouquet. bettyellen Jun 2014 #317
like little luchis stomach. needlessly angry and delicate nt La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #329
yeah- Sweetpea is still squirting occasionally, and it sucks. Adding the canned pumpkin to her 99% bettyellen Jun 2014 #332
yikes. i have put little shitter on dry food only + pumpkin La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #333
I ended up with rabbit because they thought she might be allergic to chicken and fish, which is bettyellen Jun 2014 #341
Bullshit. If you don't like what he has to say, hide posts with "Rude Pundit" in them. Stop ChisolmTrailDem Jun 2014 #270
+1 from a paying EFF supporter. TheBlackAdder Jun 2014 #279
TRP identifies his threads with "The Rude Pundit:," steer clear or update profile to 'ignore.' nt TheBlackAdder Jun 2014 #277
You've gotta go nuclear on Dick's ass. Democrats_win Jun 2014 #284
The Rude Pundit is apparently sacrosanct gollygee Jun 2014 #289
My whole point is that it is just another way DU is being trashed by ChisolmTrailDem Jun 2014 #291
I totally object to the term "PC police" gollygee Jun 2014 #301
It's all about context. Just because somebody says: ChisolmTrailDem Jun 2014 #306
People here used ro defend bullying and advocated prison rape a lot more often, redqueen Jun 2014 #304
I see you've been unable to fix that. nt ChisolmTrailDem Jun 2014 #305
actually- that has changed a lot here. Many rethought the situation. bettyellen Jun 2014 #315
I know, and those were some idiotic views. But I was actually referring to ChisolmTrailDem Jun 2014 #316
I have no idea what you are referring to, and am pretty sure I don't want to! bettyellen Jun 2014 #321
Nope, you don't. nt ChisolmTrailDem Jun 2014 #322
Okay, Mrs. Kravitz. HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #310
LOL redqueen Jun 2014 #313
upthread someone is decrying that N****r is no longer "okay". Okay then. bettyellen Jun 2014 #314
I disagree under the simple principle of I am not on this earth to tell others how to express CBGLuthier Jun 2014 #344
He calls himself "The Rude Pundit" Warren DeMontague Jun 2014 #349
May I suggest that if a DUer is offended by "rude," sexist, crude, offensive, ugly, nasty JDPriestly Jun 2014 #352
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Rude Pundit ought to ...»Reply #326