General Discussion

LAS14

(15,507 posts) Tue Apr 11, 2017, 02:08 PM Apr 2017

This remains a continual puzzle to me. (Behavior on DU.) [View all]

I posted this question about how authorities are supposed to handle situations when they must remove someone from a place. In the first link below I tried over and over to emphasize that my question was isolating a little piece of the United flap.

But still someone responded to a question I was trying not to address. (Reply #131). This happens over and over in DU. And elsewhere, of course. I don't have hopes of trying to change it, but I do wonder if other DUers are as bothered by it as I am.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8918185

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8918285

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This remains a continual puzzle to me. (Behavior on DU.) [View all] LAS14 Apr 2017 OP

You asked a question. meadowlander Apr 2017 #1

Obfuscation LOL Lib Apr 2017 #2

When they must remove someone.... Sanity Claws Apr 2017 #3

You're doing it again. I tried as hard as I could to extract an.... LAS14 Apr 2017 #4

All parts of the question are intertwined Sanity Claws Apr 2017 #5

My understanding is the officer has been placed on leave and it's under review. TNLib Apr 2017 #7

Thanks. This is to the point of my post in the other thread. But as for... LAS14 Apr 2017 #9

you're directly referencing one incident, yet ignoring both the nuance and context LanternWaste Apr 2017 #12

I can't believe someone flagged your post for flaming eniwetok Apr 2017 #6

Ridiculous. It is a meta post, but not flaming. cwydro Apr 2017 #11

Actually it's one of the ways that admin say you can help enforce Community Standards. JTFrog Apr 2017 #32

where in the rules is there a ban on "sucky" posts? eniwetok Apr 2017 #46

This is a meta post, so if it was flagged, I am surprised it stood obamanut2012 Apr 2017 #44

They did? How do you know? LAS14 Apr 2017 #8

if you're asking me... eniwetok Apr 2017 #13

Oh! Thanks! LAS14 Apr 2017 #21

Discussion boards gonna discuss. Orsino Apr 2017 #10

but the thread starter does have some right to redirect the discussion back on topic eniwetok Apr 2017 #15

Um, sez who? Orsino Apr 2017 #42

ummm... no obamanut2012 Apr 2017 #45

well, the thread starter has a right to _try_ OriginalGeek Apr 2017 #62

so the thread starter has the right... but not the thread hijackers? eniwetok Apr 2017 #69

? OriginalGeek Apr 2017 #70

Yeah, I don't mind seeing threads take off in different.... LAS14 Apr 2017 #36

Yes, but your post was not an OP question. It was, itself, taking discussion in a new direction muriel_volestrangler Apr 2017 #40

"Who will swap their seat for $2000? kentuck Apr 2017 #14

And it still would have saved United significantly over this alternative FBaggins Apr 2017 #27

Everyone has his or her price Alice11111 Apr 2017 #35

It's a visceral, not an analytical, reaction. Blood and a corporation equals racism, fascism... randome Apr 2017 #16

Doesn't look like topic drift from your question duncang Apr 2017 #17

That is not an answer to the question. It's avoidance of an answer. randome Apr 2017 #19

From what I saw duncang Apr 2017 #26

There is plenty of fault to go around. UA should never have been in this position in the 1st place. randome Apr 2017 #30

I would have been raising holy hell. tazkcmo Apr 2017 #51

The airline was legally permitted to cancel his seat and offer him another. randome Apr 2017 #52

"The airline was legally permitted to cancel his seat and offer him another." tazkcmo Apr 2017 #54

I don't understand this focus on Rule 21. randome Apr 2017 #57

Deflection. tazkcmo Apr 2017 #58

Rule 4E. randome Apr 2017 #60

no. tazkcmo Apr 2017 #61

Maybe try a few tactics first treestar Apr 2017 #18

You OP had 265 replies and this on got your knickers in a knot? TexasProgresive Apr 2017 #20

I didn't post the OP. My reply got two responses, last I looked. nt LAS14 Apr 2017 #22

Sorry, by the time I waded through all those post to get to 131 I forgot OKNancy did the OP. TexasProgresive Apr 2017 #24

I'll Give It a Try Leith Apr 2017 #23

Yes, this is the sort of reply I was looking for. Thoughts about... LAS14 Apr 2017 #25

Probably Because Leith Apr 2017 #29

that's interesting janterry Apr 2017 #56

Here's what I don't get about your problem ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #28

I don't mind going off topic, if that is signaled. What I mind... LAS14 Apr 2017 #37

You still might want to start a new topic next time ExciteBike66 Apr 2017 #41

The answer is "Offer more money until someone gives up their seat." (n/t) Iggo Apr 2017 #31

This message was self-deleted by its author ymetca Apr 2017 #33

Did you really miss this thread: athena Apr 2017 #34

Thanks. LAS14 Apr 2017 #38

It's a high priority rule rock Apr 2017 #39

What's a person to do? hunter Apr 2017 #43

This message was self-deleted by its author LAS14 Apr 2017 #47

Here's another flavor of the question in this OP, LAS14 Apr 2017 #48

By what right do you determine responses? Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #50

It seems to me that "by what right" is an inappropriate... LAS14 Apr 2017 #53

what you find meaningful and what I find meaningful may be different. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #65

I'm asking people's opinions. I'm not trying to control anything. nt LAS14 Apr 2017 #67

Trying to limit or contain a thread discussion is a bit like herding cats... Wounded Bear Apr 2017 #49

I'm not seeing this as a place for that kind of discussion janterry Apr 2017 #55

The Only Behavior One Can Control is Their Own... MedusaX Apr 2017 #59

That is exactly right. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #66

You post stuff on a blog page titaniumsalute Apr 2017 #63

Why ask a question if you want to control the answer? kcr Apr 2017 #64

I want them to respond to the question. Do you not see a difference... LAS14 Apr 2017 #68