"New Rules" from Skinner, not yet implemented. Maybe civility will return...

[babylonsister]

Comments are welcome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8603151&mesg_id=8603151

[Raine1967]

1. Thanks!

I posted a few times there --

I am concerned that many people will get lost in the sauce, as it were. There are a lot of good things there.

[quiet.american]

2. Wow. Thanks for the heads up on this.

Reading over the rule on "personal attacks" certainly brought back some unpleasant memories. :)

[Number23]

24. The personal attacks are what get me.

I have gotten into it with more than a few @ssholes here (thankfully a fair few have been banned and I wouldn't be surprised if a few more will be soon) and it truly amazes me that people think that they have the right to "go after" someone simply because they disagree with them.

I respond to an OP with "I agree" or "I disagree" and keep stepping. Someone who disagrees with me suddenly launches into attack mode and I'm supposed to just sit there and take it. I am the mother of a 2 month old baby -- I have ALOT of pent up, sleep-deprived anger just BUSTING to get out. If people would just cut out the need to try to put down and go after those who disagree with them, alot if not all of this mess would have stopped by now.

[POAS]

25. I'm going to try this without getting myself into all

kinds of trouble.

I just read a posting that quoted a columnist talking about Obama and his apologists. The ensuing discussion had nothing to do with the merits or demerits of the specifics of the article.

Rather the discussion devolved with the very first posting to a calling out session of "Obama apologists" and members of DU and even the new rules.

IMHO this is the sort of "baiting" (no matter which side starts it) the admin hopes to stop with the new rules.

:hide:

[quiet.american]

26. Number 23 -- I'd forgotten you're also a new mom!

I think you had shared that before! Congratulations! -- and I hear you about the "pent-up, sleep-deprived anger" -- oh my. (Haven't personally gone through it myself, but have been a close enough observer of it many times with the women in my family.)

[Number23]

29. Thanks, qa

:pals:
My Tasty Tomato as I call her (because her head is as round and plump as a juicy tomato) is an absolute angel. And now that she's finally figured out the difference between night and day and her father and I are starting to get a bit more sleep, I suspect that my attitude here and in general will improve considerably in the near future. In theory, anyway... :)

[quiet.american]

31. Awwww... she sounds *so* cute! Cheers, Number 23! nt

[berni_mccoy]

3. I see a lot of "concern" in that thread. Personally, I find it a long awaited relief.

I especially like the part of being thread-banned once you have a response deleted. That's going to put an end to a lot of nonsense.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. I agree and disagree.

I can think of a number of times where I or someone else have had comments deleted, only to go on and find common ground with that person and eventually make amends. We'll lose that too, but maybe it's better off that way.

[goclark]

10. Glad to know someone found common ground

My experience has been while at DU that once the name calling and lack of real facts starts ~ common ground didn't happen.

Maybe we should have a new rule ~ Seek to find common ground on at least one part of the response.

I love a great debate, I can't stand EVIL Debate, we should be better than that ~

I believe it could happen if we wanted it to ~

[POAS]

12. It's the absolutism that bothers me.

The "my way or the highway" isn't about discussion and debate or persuasion. It is about conformity.

So much more I want to say but my big mouth would take over. Moderation, poas, moderation!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

15. "Speaking truth" is one phrase that positively kills me.

Makes me want to bash my computer screen every time I see it.

[POAS]

16. Ah yes....

"speaking truth to power" when all too often it is really just an ill conceived opinion with (perhaps) a grain of truth within it.

[HughMoran]

19. Especially since I'M God

Takes a lot of nerve I tell you...

[goclark]

20. Yes ~ real Discussion

"my way or the highway" isn't about discussion .

Excellent point

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. Yeah, I think it's for the best.

And you're right - 95% of the time, exactly what you described happened. It's just sad that the 5% will end, but I agree that it must for the betterment of the site.

[Blue_Roses]

43. you can always send them a PM if you want to make amends...

sometimes that even works better...:)

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. I'm hopeful, but it's all about the application of the new rules...

and whether or not this new enforcement will wear off by September. The rules really haven't ever been the problem - it's been their willingness to allow the same few dozen assholes run rampant with their nonsense. I'd be more hopeful, but we've played this game before.

[POAS]

13. Herding cats is always a difficult task.

When the cats are man eating lions that smell red meat, well even lion tamers don't go in the cage with some lions!

[FrenchieCat]

6. Finally! Thank God this is the DEMOCRATIC Underground........

These rules make sense on a Democratic Board, if you ask me! :)

[HughMoran]

7. Am I the only one that thinks it's odd

...that several people are deliberately violating the rules in that discussion - almost daring Skinner to punish them? martyrs?

[babylonsister]

8. It's odd, but it's not, especially coming from certain people-

that's what they do, and these are still just suggestions Skinner wants feedback on. I imagine he picked up on the rudeness, too.

[POAS]

11. Well I had to slog my way thru that to get to your point

(that is what I get for staying away half the day)

But get to your point and agree with it I did.

I was going to post something on that thread but I know I'd get myself busted even under the old rules. As someone who just this week got a thread locked (and deserved it in hindsight) I thought that some posters are wearing some serious blinders when it comes to introspection.

Do I think that some of the posts in that thread were deliberately provocative, absolutely.

I like the new rules. Some will not but I suspect they would not be happy under any board rules.

[Strelnikov_]

21. Fable . . Scorpion . . Frog . . . n/t

[azmouse]

23. Reminds me of the saying

"When people show you what they are, believe them".

They are simply showing us what they are and it ain't pretty.

[HughMoran]

28. Skinner has one of the best 'bullshitometers' around too

Do people not realize this?

[demtenjeep]

9. It is the response that I was waiting for

Thank you!

[Cha]

17. Thanks babylonsister! My computer is down again..

so I'm at work just getting a little caught up.

This is indeed good news.. I've been trying to practice for these definite rules for awhile.

Gotta love the Admin and the Mods for their continued diligence in making DU an ever vibrant Dem Political Board.

[HughMoran]

18. What's this I see?

[NJmaverick]

22. I am cautiously optimistic that these changes will help

only time will tell though

[madamesilverspurs]

27. Hope springs eternal, yes?

I was glad to see Skinner's OP, but by the time I logged on there were already a gazillion responses. So I posted a simple 'thank you' in GD, got pooped on about four comments in. And the rec/unrec has been like a pogo stick.


-

[Lindsey]

30. I think this is something Skinner has really been needing to

address. I'm very satisfied with what he had to say. I love it that he said no more referring to our President in disrespectful ways. And it's evident that he's given this a whole lot of thought. It's so true that for the past decade we've had a common bond: our agony over the bush/cheney administration. Things are so completely different now that we have a Democratic President regarding DU. I have hope!

[goclark]

36. I am satisfied as well ~

[ismnotwasm]

32. What always strikes me as funny

Is out in the 'real' world, those I know involved in politics who've even heard about DU consider it VERY left leaning, and a bit wacky. Which doesn't hurt my feelings one bit. While we have our share of 'centrists' I suppose, the designation is not only subjective, but comparative within DU. You take most DU members out into the community and I think we'd find we all have much more in common (and land solidly in the 'progressive' category) than not.


Still, lately, more than usual, Debate is missing. Civility is missing. Old resentments thrive. I was looking at that thread, and saw some passionate folk, who either didn't read what I read, or read it differently. Some aren't aware of the history of why certain things came about the way they did. I got to thinking back on posts and behavior and how it's so easy have an uninformed opinion about a situation with bad information. Bad information is like a virus, had to slow, much less stop, even harder to cure.

I don't start threads usually, but I read plenty. Patterns are there, always open to interpretation, of course.

For instance, there are a couple of posters who can be extremely obnoxious IMO, in that I adamantly don't agree with them on a couple of issues. However, I turn around and agree with them 100% on others. (one reason I don't use the ignore function. The other being I don't post enough to need to)

What I like about it isn't so much the new 'rules'--which aren't that many really-- but the acknowledgment of the need for basic civility during debate.

[POAS]

33. Good points

As another who doesn't post much (maybe that will change now that I'm retired) I read threads in which I have no vested interest (as a participant) and am often left shaking my head.

I see entirely too much "my way of the highway" thinking and that cannot lead to a discussion. I see entirely too much attempting to define who is or is not a "true" liberal, progressive or Democrat.

Regrettably I saw resistance and resentment in the thread started by Skinner. People are impatient, resent having to conform to the rules here at DU while simultaneously demanding conformity to their own definition of what constitutes "liberalism".

[CTLawGuy]

34. it should not be hard for people to grasp

the concept that this is DEMOCRATIC Underground and that we support DEMOCRATS here. If you spend your time insulting DEMOCRATS people will not be happy with you. What a shock!

[POAS]

35. Apparently it is hard for some.

I'm amazed at some of the comments right there in Skinner's new rules thread.

I came to BOG only recently because I didn't know it was here. Once I found out about BOG and read the posts I went the extra mile and contributed to DU after several years of "freeloading" so that I could post here. My reason is that I saw BOG as a safe haven where I could express an opinion, even a contrarian opinion if not rude or insulting, without feeling set upon.

This is my refuge but to others BOG seems to represent "the enemy" and for the life of me I cannot figure out that rationale.

[HughMoran]

37. It's turned into a flamefest

They usually do. Skinner will lock it soon.

[Raine1967]

38. I was reading it again this morning and saw that as well.

It's almost like people WANT to be myopic just because they can. After a day, I think it deserves to be locked. I think everyone had a chance to make the points and voices were heard.


But that's me. When it devolves like that, it's time. I like what The Admins are proposing here. I have already seen a difference on the board itself, and I like it.

[POAS]

39. I think the new rules will

work. Some will, of course, continue to poke around the edges and others will be outright anarchistic. The mods are going to be pulling their hair out for awhile.

[Raine1967]

41. I think you're right.

There are always going to be people who want to push it to the edge, just because they can, I guess.

All I know is that this is a home that I was allowed inside of. It's not my house.

When I go to someone's house I follow their rules. It's basic common sense that My Momma taught me.

[treestar]

40. It would be nice for DU to be a refuge again

Just had the annual father's day barbecue, which, like most holidays meant listening to freepish and otherwise right wingnut relatives. I used to come onto DU after these to find some solace in like minded people.

Now it's like hearing the same thing again!

[Blue_Roses]

42. I hope this helps...

and I especially like this:

"Now that we have a Democratic President, I do not think it is unreasonable to expect that he be shown more respect here than the illegitimate, incompetent asshole who previously held the office. He should be referred to as "President Obama," "Barack Obama," or simply "Obama."

:)

[quiet.american]

44. That one I really, really liked as well. nt

[Kahuna]

45. Don't hold your breath. What I see is a lot of people outing themselves

as disruptors. It has already happened and many have been banned. I see many more being banned before it's over.

A lot of DUers think it is perfectly acceptable to use DU as a platform for their non-Democratic activities. It has always been that way. Every so often the Admins have to make an announcement like the most recent one reminding DU that it still supports Democrats only. PERIOD. Still, they will forget and continue their disruptive behavior.

Notice how on that thread, there's a sub thread deriding about this group. Are you 'effin kidding me??? This forum has been around for years. This just shows the mindset of those who don't want to come to a consensus of any kind.

[Number23]

46. "This forum has been around for years."

That is truly the one component to all of the anguish that I don't get.

If you go to the front page of the BOG, the welcome message from Skinner is dated from 2006. 2006!! This forum has been here for almost four years. And not only that, EVERY MAJOR DEMOCRAT has a group. The John Kerry group is the only Dem group more active than this one. And in each one of those groups, you will find mostly appreciative, supportive posts for whomever the group is named after. That is the whole DAMN purpose of having the group.

There is a cooking and baking group on DU too. How many people who hate cooking and baking go into that group?? And if you did hate cooking and baking and went into the cooking and baking group and disparaged cooking and/or baking, what are the chances that you would be kicked out of said cooking and baking group? And would anyone with 3/5 of a brain be surprised by that????

And yet, all you hear about is the BOG, the BOG, the BOG. It's as if these people's dislike of this man has completely fried their ability at even the most elementary logic and common sense. And yet, I'm supposed to believe that they have a grasp of complex policy issues? Yeah, right.

[HughMoran]

47. Besides a very occasional locked post, this group is a propaganda-free zone.

I 'get it' in that there is a 'team sport' 'us versus 'them' aspect to this whole kerfuffle; what I don't get is that the end result of damaging Obama and Democrats in general is anti-motivational to the most active Democrats and thus not good for the anybody on the left. Constructive criticism can be helpful in putting pressure on Democrats, I do that from time to time as appropriate. But what purpose does always attacking Obama serve? Is the purpose to 'win'? What is winning? Obama gets impeached? Dems lose control of Congress and Obama loses power? Obama doesn't get reelected? I know what my goal is, and it doesn't involve discrediting President Obama.

[POAS]

48. " Besides a very occasional locked post".....guilty !!!!

:dunce:

[HughMoran]

49. Lol - I had one locked a few months back

Most everybody here has had one locked post, very few have had more than one locked, and they are generally spread out in time.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kahuna]

50. +1

:hi:

[Cha]

52. I think this is an excellent idea they've come up with..

". When a member has a post deleted from a thread, that member will be automatically blocked from posting again in that thread.

We understand that this idea may upset some people. We understand that nobody wants to be blocked out of a discussion thread because of an honest posting mistake, and we do not want to do that to any of our members. But we believe blocking one person out of a thread is a less draconian solution than locking the entire thread so nobody can participate.

We know many of you are tired of threads getting locked when the original post does not break the rules. We are tired of locking those threads. Members have long complained that under our current approach, a determined person (or group of people) can get a thread locked by repeatedly breaking the rules in the thread so it is almost impossible for the moderators to clean up after them.

If someone is blocked out of a thread after their first deletion, then they have a disincentive to break the rules in the first place. Furthermore, it provides an incentive for other people to alert on rule-breaking posts so the author of those posts can be stopped from causing further damage.

Would this always be fair? Of course not. But our sincere hope is that we could completely stop locking threads when the original post does not break the rules. We also hope that we could completely stop the practice of deleting entire sub-threads -- which often results in "innocent bystanders" having their posts removed unfairly."

I'm thinking of all those threads in the past where the OPs got their threads locked bc some posters continued to break the rules with personal attacks..knowing full well it would get the thread locked.