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

TexasProgresive

(12,655 posts)
6. What you say has the ring of truth.
Thu Jul 30, 2015, 09:05 AM
Jul 2015

I am not against people expressing their opinions or feelings. I have only alerted on one post and wanted to claw it back-fortunately the jury was right this time and did not vote to hide. It was a case of misunderstanding what the person posted.

When on juries I never vote to hide unless the poster is attacking the person they are replying to. That's pretty much my rule. I have expressed my opinion that the jury system is a poor way to deal with problem posts. It was much better here when we had moderators who seemed to be fair.

I'm not sure if it is happening but some are saying that there are serial alerters who alert constantly on certain people until they get enough hides to ban them. If that is the case those people should be banned. I would like several things to be added to the jury system - the alert needs to go before a moderator to see if it has merit, any results to hide should be appealed, and finally the jury results need to be forwarded to the poster with the option of deleting the offending post.

I doubt any of that will come to pass because there isn't the will to do it.

Recommendations

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

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Who is winning the war of...»Reply #6