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

The DU Lounge

ProfessorGAC

(75,636 posts)

7. Same Here

Reply to Skittles (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 26, 2024, 07:05 AM

Oct 2024

In fact, I've only alerted a few times ever & those were obvious trolls violating TOS.
I had 100% confidence a jury would hide the post.
The slightest ambiguity, I would not alert.
In fact, the post to which the OP is referring came before MIRT, and I thought it was obvious sarcasm.
I do agree it would have been useful to add a sarcasm tag, but I never would have voted to hide it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Use the "sarcasm" emoji, please [View all] central scrutinizer Oct 2024 OP

If it wasn't clearly sarcastic... then perhaps you should not have given the benefit-of-the-doubt.... hlthe2b Oct 2024 #1

I rejected the post central scrutinizer Oct 2024 #2

Personally, I don't assume that someone (on this forum) would be offensive. chouchou Oct 2024 #3

Trolls, bots and disrupters central scrutinizer Oct 2024 #4

I understand. chouchou Oct 2024 #5

people are too easily offended Skittles Oct 2024 #6

Same Here ProfessorGAC Oct 2024 #7

we have more in common than date and time joined and age Skittles Oct 2024 #9

Chicago Exurbs ProfessorGAC Oct 2024 #10

Problem is, stylistically, if you label your sarcasm, it isn't working. malthaussen Oct 2024 #8

All the more reason to alert, then Hekate Oct 2024 #11