Fuck Susan Sarandon: If she'd (Hillary) won, we'd be at war

[TexasTowelie]

105. I'm usually wary about mentioning anything related to forum moderation,

but I do no want to see another amnesty.

Skinner gave a blanket amnesty in June of last year so the banned members were already provided a second chance. The new rules were stated and for better or worse people were either FFR'd or PPR'd because they violated those rules. I don't see why the banned members should be provided a third chance to be divisive because they most likely will be banned again since they failed to learn anything during the previous amnesty.

Yes, there were some that were targeted (that supported both political campaigns), but those members also painted the targets on themselves. DU still remains divisive and I don't miss the "contribution" of flame-bait threads that serve little purpose besides agitate and infuriate.

When young children misbehave responsible parents step up to stop the undesired behavior--they don't tell the children to resume the bad behavior. I don't see why the administrators would want to reward the "bad actors" by allowing them to return to DU. I don't want to ever see the posters that called Hillary the "c-word" or made anti-Semitic statements about Bernie to become active members again.

I'm fine with the rules that the administrators established and I don't believe it is appropriate to interfere with forum moderation by making a declarative statement that it is time for another amnesty (note--I am not alerting on your post). Perhaps your suggestion should be brought up in ATA rather than one of the open forums?