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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Donald Trump just convinced me to vote for Hillary if the nominee [View all]SusanLarson
(284 posts)74. I reported it.
I reported it.
The reported post attacked the poster of the parent thread as a joke, and ignored the issues raised by the them. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of Rude, or over-the-top
Rude
Discourteous or impolite, especially in a deliberate way
over the top
to an excessive or exaggerated degree.
The reported post met both definitions.
It's ok though, changes are coming...
From my recent post on this very issue from the ask the Administrators forum...
To enhance and protect the civility of DU it is time to establish a clear rule in the Terms of Service against personal attacks. While the TOS protects against disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate posts it's not enough and Skinner needs to make it perfectly clear.
Here is one example:Attack the issue never the person. The posting of messages on which are of a threatening tone; intended solely to communicate sarcasm, contempt, or derision; are intended to belittle or ridicule a person or group; to disgust the viewer; will not be permitted.
Here's another:Bashing or flaming of an individual or group is not acceptable behavior on this website.
Those are just examples, Skinner should come up with his own wording; it is the policy which is sorely needed to enhance civility especially in an election season.
We should be able to discuss the issues raised in the political seasons without being subjected to unrepentant attacks intended to silence us.
This will make it perfectly clear to the jurors that this type of behavior crosses the lines no matter which candidate that person supports.
Here was Skinner's response...
Skinner (61,567 posts) - We are going to do this.
For many years DU had a list of rules with a strong focus on civility. We moved away from that approach when we introduced the jury system in 2011, but once the primaries are over we are going to go back to having a list of rules that all of our members are expected to follow. The job of jurors will be narrowly defined to deciding whether a post violates our rules. Jurors who are unwilling or unable to enforce our rules will not serve on juries.
We'll have a lot more to say about the details once the primaries are over.
I look forward to re-establishing a requirement for civility...
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
188 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Its very progressive to fight the GOP: Sanders is not a Dem he is a socialist
lewebley3
May 2016
#155
No, she said she voted for HRC as her Senator but voted for Bernie in the primary.
leftofcool
May 2016
#5
Basic reading comprehension can indeed, be a difficult struggle. Good luck!
LanternWaste
May 2016
#40
Well stated. Looks like only about 13% of Bernie supporters view him favorably.
leftofcool
May 2016
#4
A minority of Republicans have blocked Democratic nominees. If Democratic Senators want to be
merrily
May 2016
#127
The had pResident Chenney and the GOP along with too many Democrats to help him
Vincardog
May 2016
#76
The only reason all Republican pols aren't supporting him now is because he's too frank.
herding cats
May 2016
#109
If Sanders had won, I too would be voting against Trump, not for Sanders. That works, surely.
seabeyond
May 2016
#22
First of all, Gore had more votes than Nader, but the Republicans stole the election through
world wide wally
May 2016
#83
As far as I'm concerned, voting for Hillary Clinton is giving up. We are now in a
Gene Debs
May 2016
#111
The "evil gop" is the key phrase. Obstructionism has gone on since Obama took office.
brush
May 2016
#118
Ahhh . . . it won the White House twice and has a very good chance of winning the Senate . . .
brush
May 2016
#180
Nowhere in my post did I advocate a Republican presidency. Read what it actually says instead of
Gene Debs
May 2016
#113
As if a post count has any bearing on the points made in any discussion. I'm sure your
Gene Debs
May 2016
#116
NOT voting for her EVER! Hope that's clear enough. And won't apologize for not doing so either.
SammyWinstonJack
May 2016
#96
Another lo poster who will be voting for Trump. Is that you Susan Sarandon?
redstateblues
May 2016
#177
Same here. I've never said otherwise. And I've never bashed Clinton on this board.
drm604
May 2016
#50
Sorry, but the choice between Trump & Clinton is like choosing how you want to be hurt
Bucky
May 2016
#44
Those who will not or cannot say NO will never have power or influence because those that
TheKentuckian
May 2016
#102
thanks. I can't believe how much people use the jury system to bully other people
MariaThinks
May 2016
#101
I been saying for some time now that I would vote for a turnip if it had a "D" after its name.
Beacool
May 2016
#72
He already is worse than Bush. One cannot imagine the unimaginable, but worse wouldn't suffice.
L. Coyote
May 2016
#97
Great post. Anyone who would switch from Sanders to Trump has no values. Anyone who
lunamagica
May 2016
#161
Let's throw this out there for all you Berniacs that would vote Hillary...
chwaliszewski
May 2016
#172