Another thread on the new rules

[POAS]

with clarifying input by skinner: warning it's pretty long.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8608296&mesg_id=8608296

[quiet.american]

1. Yes, yes, yes! This item - well said on Skinner's part:

"But I do not think it is remotely realistic to forbid people from pointing out that choosing not to vote for the Democrat in a general election helps the Republican. I know that sounds biased and unfair. But think about it. That is an *actual issue*. If someone says "I regret ever voting for Obama", how can we possibly forbid people from pointing out that the alternative was much worse? This is the absolute crux of the disagreement here on DU. The split is emphatically *not* progressives vs centrists. The split is, roughly speaking, idealists vs pragmatists. If we had a rule like that, a "fair" counterpart to limit the other side would be something like "Do not disparage real-world policy proposals because they fall short of ideal proposals that are highly unlikely to be enacted into law under the current political environment." I'm sure you agree that such a rule would be utterly anathema to discussion. It would not be remotely realistic to try to have a rule like that.

Exactly. And that's all I'm going to say because I don't want my post deleted for violations! :)

[POAS]

2. Without specificity I think

it may be safe for me to say that more than a few of those posts would be deleted under the new rules. Glad I'm not a moderator. Talk about a thankless job!

Did you notice the one about 2/3 of the way through about self requesting a tombstone? Shaking my head!

[quiet.american]

3. Hadn't seen that. Oy. nt

[POAS]

4. here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8608296&mesg_id=8616831

[quiet.american]

5. Reminds me of the David Obey/John Boehner exchange before the final House HCR vote.

You'd have to see it, but Boehner asked a procedural question that was out of order for the House, and Obey, who was presiding, finally asked him... "what is that... a rhetorical question?" This was during Boehner's whole "Hell No You Can't!" rant. His entire speech that night is comedy gold.

[Number23]

7. hey, how do you create a link to an individual post like that??

Every time I want to link to a post in a thread, I have to do it the old school way and link to the individual post from the list of posts so depending on how big the thread is, it could take a second or three before the post I'm linking to shows up.

Thanks!

[namahage]

9. In the right hand corner of the post is a link called "Permalink."

Click on that, and you will be taken to a page that displays the individual post at the top. Then simply copy and paste the link.
Here's an example from Graywarrior's thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=8358611&mesg_id=9409264

[Number23]

10. hey, thanks!

I knew it wouldn't it be difficult. Perhaps if I'd taken the oh, 3 SECONDS to figure it out for myself, I wouldn't be red-faced right now. :blush:
:hi:

[yowzayowzayowza]

12. You can also jus right click on the permalink or thread tree...

and choose 'copy link location' er sum such. That way you don't have to load the whole page just to get the link.

:hi:

[POAS]

11. I didn't do a

"view all" first.

just search down the list of posts to the one you want to link to and slick on it. That post will appear at the top of the page with the rest still shown as a list below. Use that header for your link!

[HughMoran]

6. Another golden nugget from Skinner

I can tell he's more of a pragmatist than not.

[Number23]

8. "The split is, roughly speaking, idealists vs pragmatists."

Thank you. Skinner, a million times -- thank you.

As someone who sees nothing wrong with idealism but considers herself a pragmatist, I couldn't agree more with this assessment.

[Clio the Leo]

13. My only request is that they sticky rule threads in GD and GDP....

.... I rarely if ever read GD and the only way I knew about new rules was someone making a thread about it in GDP.

Granted, the odds of me violating a rule by saying something disparaging about the President aren't all that high. :)

[POAS]

14. But don't ya know

it's about the censorship.

That and a perceived bias towards "centrist" dems seem to be the prevailing complaint by the detractors of the new rules.

edited to add: I agree that Skinner's original rules thread should be stickied to the top of all forums and groups. (At least the OP, probably not all the ensuing back and forth "discussion")

Remember though that, as I understand it, this is a "draft" version of the new rules and once the kinks are worked out and they go into effect he may post them as a sticky at least temporarily so all or most become aware.