Stinking elephant carcass in the room. 50% of that jury was apparently comprised of homophobic,

[stevenleser]

21. I think the Host/SOP setup works and MIRT/TOS alerts work

The jury system, however, is a mess. I understand the theory behind it, let the community decide what is ok and what isn't ok. But too often, it doesn't work in practice.

You have to give juries firm guidelines and then ban people who don't adhere to those guidelines from jury duty. If you don't vote to hide a bigoted post, one so bigoted that it gets the poster tombstoned, you don't belong on a jury (and probably don't belong on any Democratic leaning site). If you vote to allow a personal attack to stand because that poster is on your side of pro/anti Obama or pro-atheism or pro-religion, etc., you don't belong on a jury. If you cannot be impartial because you and the poster of the item in question had issues in the past, and you use the jury adjudication as a way to get even with that poster, you shouldn't be serving on a jury.

For some reason, all of the opinions I just wrote are at odds with the admins and preponderance of DU. What we see here is the result. Today, I alerted on a post that was a strong attack on a particular religion and those who observe it (not one that I observe). It was hidden by a 4-2 margin, but even there, it barely made it. One more vote and it would have not been hidden. Two people out of six voted to allow a bigoted post to stand. If you add that to this anti gay alert result discussed.in the OP, 50% of.the two juries voted to allow bigoted statements to stand. That shows.that at the very least the jury system needs serious adjustment.