General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsShut Discussionist down!...
......and chalk it up to an experiment gone bad. For that steaming pile of shit to be associated to Democratic Underground is a God Damn shame.
Nuff said!
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)I'm thinking Stormfront has been having a blast on it.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)CANDO
(2,068 posts)And it started out very civil. It has become the sandbox with cats shitting in it. The wing nuts are beyond reaching. I'm starting to not go there as often.
stonecutter357
(12,819 posts)
CANDO
(2,068 posts)Just started my journey last Dec.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)3rdwaydem
(277 posts)Squinch
(54,555 posts)
Initech
(104,107 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)And I have at times contributed to that there so I am not an innocent.
sheshe2
(90,338 posts)Must certainly did not like what I was reading there. We have more than enough Racist Homophobic Misogynistic attitudes here on DU. Why the hell would I want to read more with less filters?
Oh yes, lets not forget all that Obama sucks crap there too. 
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)sheshe2
(90,338 posts)but we already knew that justin. It's not worth your energy there.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
sendero
(28,552 posts).. it's their blatant dishonesty that leaves me cold. You cannot have a "discussion" with someone who won't acknowledge the basic irrefutable facts.
Gothmog
(159,754 posts)The conservatives on this board are stupid and racist. They can not deal with facts and it is fun using facts to push them into corners. The conservatives on the Discussionist are really stupid but fun to play with because they are too stupid to deal with facts or logic.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)In the seven years I've been a member here, I've been attacked lots of times by some pretty cruel DUers too.
And let me tell you, to make a comparison, it's like the difference between being verbally abused by some random stranger on the street and being verbally abused by your own family.
It's not enough to be a Democrat here. You have to be a certain kind of Democrat. If you're not...if you have opinions that differ from the script... then God help you. You'll get swarmed by people accusing you of being all sorts of evil things.
Actually, I went on a hunt for (and found) one particular thread from 2010, on DU2, where I wrote about a particularly difficult time I had with my daughter in the mid 1980s which led to my having to make some hard choices, and I was torn apart like a fucking piece of meat by people who had no idea what it was like to walk in my shoes at that time.
So please...let's not be hypocrites here.
Some DUers can be just as cruel as any RWer.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)pipi_k
(21,020 posts)It means a lot to me to see my experience validated.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)It didn't used to be that way, in the early days most were liberals or progressives.
To me it seemed to get worse after the launch of DU3 but that may just be because less posts were deleted.
I have differences of opinion with fellow DU'ers all the time and the difference between arguing with a liberal and a right winger is day and night. A liberal argues with facts and a right winger argues with personal shots and strawmen. When you point out that they aren't using facts but personal opinion they will cite "they" or "certain" or "others", never anything concrete. The kicker is many if not most call themselves liberal, but I have had a few actually say they were conservative and proud of it.
But it's just the internet, try not to take anything someone else might say personal. But I know what you mean, I have had my button pushed a few times too.
demigoddess
(6,675 posts)before they go all postal on it. Was away for a few years and then came back things were much more like dealing with ideologues.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)And then go ballistic.
The group I am thinking of has like three trolls, and many people just won't go to the forum they reign over. Why get tortured, here on DU, when you can go on FB, and have a crowd of supportive people that care enough to actually read the posts you make, before they make any comments?
heaven05
(18,124 posts)and it's cruelty has permeated every nook and cranny of living existence. Bastions such as this offers some sanity, yet cruelty has been displayed here countless times. Until the human race makes a huge change, sad to say, it will be with us to the end of the earth.
polly7
(20,582 posts)pipi_k
(21,020 posts)It did hurt, a whole lot. Because I never expected some of the answers I got.
polly7
(20,582 posts)words on a message board and in no way represent anyone meaningful in your life. But yes, it does almost take your breath away when it happens from people you thought you knew.
Z_California
(650 posts)That's why I mostly read and don't bother posting. Also why Democrats can't seem to be the majority in government even though we're the majority in the real world.
Submariner
(12,915 posts)I hear ya pipi. About the time Obama was first inaugurated, a new batch of members with right leaning tendencies showed up here, and it hasn't been like the old Liberal DU since. Hang in there, and ignore the whiners.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)you could get mobbed by people who either think you're an apostate or have their noses so far up your business they can't see.
Not all the time, of course, but enough to really hurt the experience.
And I've been in "conversations" that went sort of like this...
"I don't like the color blue that much."
"HOW DARE YOU HATE GREEN!"
(Makes you question your own sanity.)
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)is one who will be a cheerleader for whoever the Democratic establishment is running, no matter how badly they sell out women, the poor, minorities and anyone else not writing them six figure checks.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)liberals are well represented there.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)They seem to get really pissed off over that, the jealous buggers.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)There is a good reason that Discussionist is a separate site.
JaydenD
(294 posts)to bring here. The idea that it would take some trash away from here to there, is working in just the reverse.
Much evidence of that....like a staging ground for trolls....
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
eridani
(51,907 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
greatauntoftriplets
(177,385 posts)
TBF
(35,056 posts)trolls are let in daily. Yes, the regular repeater and very obvious ones that are well known are caught quickly. But I personally had right-wingers on MIRT challenging me on trolls and saying things like "there's not enough" to TS them when they were clearly spewing right-wing drivel. All it takes is one or two MIs on MIRT to affect operations (because in the spirit of teamwork you need to hold off from TSing someone if not all in the group agree), the jury system is a fail, and Discussionist is an embarrassment at best.
I think we see that third way dems = republicans and that is as much as I'm going to say.
babylonsister
(171,898 posts)Why would I want to? I'm not anywhere to argue anymore. For the most part. 
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Since I have to deal with entitled and well off right wingers in my real daily life, it gives me an opportunity to practice so to speak. The fact is we do have to live with the other half. We can't kill them. That would make us them.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)Gothmog
(159,754 posts)I live in Texas where the right wingers feel entitled. I have a very high tolerance for stupidity and I enjoy playing with the conservaties
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)TBF
(35,056 posts)
Generic Other
(29,020 posts)As long as we are not underwriting the social experiment with our stars...I guess we have nothing to say.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)phylny
(8,713 posts)I support DU monthly, but I'll be mighty pissed off if my money is being diverted to that shit hole.
DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)2 seconds over there. Nope never was interested.
NRaleighLiberal
(61,010 posts)
hlthe2b
(108,384 posts)
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)It's fun "talking" with RWers. Although, I have learned that most of them are addicted to the Kool-aid. It's been an excellent learning tool.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts) 
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)because everybody's sacred beliefs get challenged. That can be pretty hard to do.
creeksneakers2
(7,639 posts)More diversity.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)
Inkfreak
(1,695 posts)I think there's about a half dozen core rethug trolls. Otherwise there can be fun discussions. I've had a few. I tend to just ignore the worst. The Doctor was a particularly mean individual though. Nasty stuff.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)The quality of right winger is kind of low, but I'm hopeful.
CrispyQ
(39,225 posts)
Gothmog
(159,754 posts)I have a high tolerance for stupidity and bigotry and I have fun playing with the conservatives
pscot
(21,044 posts)Some of those people at DI must have been raised by lizards, they're that cold-blooded. But the rigidity of mind at work around here isn't all that pleasant either. So far I haven't noticed any cliquishness over there. And civility is an open topic, as it should be.
NightWatcher
(39,360 posts)I'm actually shocked it is still around.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)If one does not like it one need not go there.
I think Skinner has a good thing going there and I wish him success.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Vomit.
polly7
(20,582 posts)I don't go there often, but usually have fun when I do. And there are some very, very smart people there who work hard trying to discuss civilly with 'some' right-wingers who aren't nearly as bad as I'd thought. Heck, I've even found some new respect for some of them, 'some' of them truly believe in making things better in the world ..... just not the same way I do, which is no crime. Sorry, my thumb isn't working well so the spacebar is hit and miss. As for the misogynist trolls, they're gotten rid quickly, imo, and the ones that remain are a blast to make fools of, though I am deeply sorry for the women who they do hurt badly, as long as they remain. Discussionist works for me just fine.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)And I agree with whoever it was above who said it's more like RL because after all we can't just sanitize the world to make it the way we would like it. Better to learn how to speak to people who have different opinions and I found Discussionist to be far less civil at times than I found DU to be.
Haven't been there for a while, mainly due to RL being so busy. But I intend to go back.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)
7962
(11,841 posts)Funny how thin skinned so many DUers can be. I dont think its really that bad.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)That includes me. If one is open to having their precious examined and can defend it, Discussionist can be great. If one is looking for a support group, it's probably not a good place to go.
7962
(11,841 posts)
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Emphasis on the raving part.
Leith
(7,858 posts)It's pathetic. Don't even try to count the threads about DU over there. The whining would be unbearable if it weren't so funny.
alp227
(32,561 posts)Response to Leith (Reply #24)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)
pecwae
(8,021 posts)
Puglover
(16,380 posts)Irony seems lost on some.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)...so I can see why that wouldn't appeal to many D.U.ers.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)
Response to The Straight Story (Reply #30)
Post removed
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)don't agree with someone you're a troll, misogynist, etc.
If you think everyone who doesn't agree with you is an enemy I don't know what to tell you.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)You don't like this place. Admit it and move on. If you have any memory at all , I'm not one of your perpetual detractors but I've seen enough of your whining here to know that you really don't feel at home here.
I don't think everyone who disagrees with me is the enemy. If you have any institutional memory you know that. You have stated here that you find Discussionist more to your liking. Fine. Stay there. Don't come here to pout about how DUers aren't welcoming your decidedly unDemocratic Party positions on topics.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)I would have thought after that stupid racist OP of yours and the horrid shitshow that constituted your "apology", you would have slinked away in shame.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Written by a Buchanan fan and published on a paleoconservative/borderline white supremacist site.
kcr
(15,522 posts)Clearly that isn't always the case
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)I suppose "MRA member" is included in "etc" but since "misogynist" was called out specifically, I think MRA should be too
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)
alp227
(32,561 posts)Where would you draw the line?
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)And for what it's worth, "stupidity" in posts is so common, it's not worth alerting on.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
LeftOfWest
(482 posts)"Conservative" Democrat....what a bunch of crap.
You are Republican....
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)
Just FYI, there are more "Conservative Democrats" in the Democratic party than there are "Very Liberal Democrats", which is what makes up the bulk of the D.U.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Gothmog
(159,754 posts)I enjoy your posts
Laffy Kat
(16,573 posts)Kind of a bribe-out sort of thing? The site doesn't directly bother me, as I have no intention of going there, but it bothers me that it bothers other DU-ers. Just an idea.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I don't go there, except for a couple of peeks, but I'm certainly not going to give money to people who would run a site like that.
Laffy Kat
(16,573 posts)
And I don't think the Admins here would ever even consider doing something so underhanded as being a party to bribery.
So, OK, what this post is essentially saying is...
Whatever "bothers" the poor sensitivities of DUers should be shut down. No matter what it is or where it is.
I guess this is sort of like when DUers offended by Fox News or some other RW television thing think they have the right to shut it down, even if it's being played in someone's place of business. And they'll even use blackmail...vowing to never step foot in that business again...if the owner doesn't change the channel IMMEDIATELY.
Hey, people don't want to see Fux News, fine. Next time bring earplugs and a book or something. I just play games on my iPhone to tune out the crap.
But I think a lot of this is about trying to control what OTHER people see and hear and read.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)I guess this is sort of like when DUers offended by Fox News or some other RW television thing think they have the right to shut it down, even if it's being played in someone's place of business. And they'll even use blackmail...vowing to never step foot in that business again...if the owner doesn't change the channel IMMEDIATELY.
Um...that's called protesting. It's a legitimate way to change something. If an owner of a store I went into had a radio show on that was full of blatant racism and homophobia, I would walk out and let them know that I would not be coming back unless that was changed. Fox News is just a (barely more) subtle version of RW hate programs.
It's not about controlling what other people see and hear and read; it's about airing a grievance and attempting to effect change. It's great that you have the privilege to ignore it. I probably could too. But I don't, because I see the hurt that shows like that bring to others.
Blackmail...what a ludicrous idea.
creeksneakers2
(7,639 posts)for all Skinner and the others have done for us. They deserve support, not threats.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts) Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)any posts by her.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)She just recently turned over a brand new key.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)pipi_k
(21,020 posts)At first I was sort of annoyed, but now I find myself almost looking forward to her next incarnation, and the creative efforts put forth in each new screen name.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)It gives her away.
But I rather her be there than here.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)It's almost comical how obvious she makes herself.
Gotta give her props for her persistence, though... I've had cases of Athlete's foot fungus that weren't half as stubborn.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Autumn
(47,484 posts)and they leave other people alone.
TransitJohn
(6,934 posts)That site's a cash grab. I doubt your moral outrage or delicate sensibilities matter much to the bottom line.
It's a technology sell-out. The DU framework was just too good for DU.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)until it serves as a platform for disrupting this site, which it is. Fark that.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Just because there is criticism over there about here, it's not disrupting this site anymore than Free Republic is.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)The witch hunts did not catch on, so time to demand another site be dismantled because some here don't like what is being said over there...
Some are not satisfied unless they can forbid something and control what is being said...it is the less attractive part of our human nature.
MADem
(135,425 posts)The offender is gone, the juries sanctioned him, the admins pizza'd him, so I don't understand why the continued hectoring about some jerk who has been shown the door.
On the bright side, it earns the admins a nice payday. They should get something out of all this agita.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)and describing it in graphic detail. Or using threads in open forums to conspire about how to get certain DU posters banned.
JaydenD
(294 posts)Du's sister site is worse than Freeperville. yikes. And star members here are supporting that outhouse hole.
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)I wasn't yesterday but I don't see a post like that making it thru a jury even over there
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)
Calista241
(5,621 posts)Talk about rage.
Gothmog
(159,754 posts)That took some work
The conservatives on the Discussionist are idiots but they are fun to play with. I have a very high tolerance for stupidity and bigotry due to living in Texas and being a lawyer there is not much that they can say to me that has any effect. It is difficult to insult someone in my profession and make it stick.
I am working on a number of issues over on this board and have been somewhat successful in a number of threads.
JustAnotherGen
(34,556 posts)It tastes like vinegar served out of a dirty ashtray to type it - but yep. The Freepers are a higher class of poster than those on Discussnst.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)that have found Discussionist. Not to say that Freepers live in a reality-based world (since they're still Freepers), but the posters at FR are of a higher caliber and can actually keep it civil. Most times.
Response to BainsBane (Reply #116)
Cleita This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Please advise your ISP, the Ads and the police about this. This person needs to be reported on and removed from the internet altogether.
polly7
(20,582 posts)I think it's just to stir up shit, but that's just my own little humble opinion.
I don't get that either
ismnotwasm
(42,609 posts)But from the many comments I have read I agree.
What possible purpose does it serve? It's like a whole site devoted to meta, along with RW/Racist/sexist spew instead of one forum.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... like meta, maybe?
Do you find it conceivable that some people like or dislike things different than you?
The owners of this site must have thought it served a purpose.
ismnotwasm
(42,609 posts)DU is not the only place I frequent, and I've had lively, interesting discussions with people who disagree with me.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... that some other sites may have a purpose even if you don't see it? Good.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I wouldn't tell anyone to eschew a good chunk of their income stream because I didn't like the product they were selling.
I would just Not Buy The Product.
I think this thread is close to the disruptive meta category, too. Maybe you should consider shutting IT down...?
Are you going to send the admins here a check for the money they give up if they shut that site down?
Cleita
(75,480 posts)A lot of problems can be solved on this website by ignore and other means.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Just don't go there. Doesn't seem difficult to me.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts).... it's very existence is loathsome. And things I find loathsome should not be permitted to exist!
That's a good, liberal position, right?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Just ignore them and they'll go away. And just ignore that that strategy has never worked.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You can't go to their house and stand outside with a sign saying "This pathetic dweeb makes anonymous death threats on the internet and his name is (fill in the blank)."
Juries took the guy out and the admins tombstoned him. So POOF--he is gone.
You're not going to be delivered his beating heart on a plate.
He wasn't "ignored." He was called to account and sanctioned.
Seems to me the system worked.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)in about 5 minutes. Ooooo, the horrific punishment.
By people who did the opposite of what you were proposing - they didn't ignore him. They alerted on his post.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I'm a fan of alerting on hate-speech posts. I've already said that, in case you missed it. And apparently, you did.
I just don't think giving the posters a load of angst-ridden dramatics in thread after thread after thread about how upset the posts make you (that's a generic you, not you specifically) feel does anything but, as they say, FEED THE TROLL.
These are just little asswipes trying to get your goat. Do you want them pilloried and scourged? Sent to the jail? Horsewhipped?
They're probably fourteen, obese and with acne. No one pays them any notice IRL and they're piqued about that. This is the only way they can feel powerful, by using vulgar angry language and making people squeal in horror--it's the 21st Century warped version of putting a pigtail in an inkwell--that didn't get the girl to like them back then, either.
Just deny them the thrill. If they don't get any feedback, it's not any FUN for them.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)like what you see--and craft it in an image that suits YOUR vision.
Go on, then. Make an offer. Buy them out. Write a check and then you can be boss.
But don't expect people who run a site for a living to close it down because a few people went ballistic over a poster who said some jerky things and got tossed off the site for saying them.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)It's not about helping democrats, or Democrats, or Progressives, Liberals, or liberals.
Discussionist is right-wing-nut-job flypaper. DU is generally a pool of intelligent, fired-up, talkative-- argumentative democrats, liberals, and progressives. Point that pool of people at a site filled with RWNJ morons, and watch as the hit count on both sites jumps. Controversy means views, views means ad impressions, and impressions mean clicks. It's like printing money.
The administration has moved to be as hands-off as possible (administration takes time, and time is money.)
Notice how jury results are sacrosanct- no jury has ever been overturned, even when an alerter flat out lied in an alert, and 4 jurors were duped. Why? Because that would mean admitting that self-administration is a crock of shit.
Have you noticed that many older links on DU3 have been monetized? Search the source of a bookmarked thread on DU, you'll likely see at least one link to viglink.com, even though it doesn't show up as viglink.com when you mouse over it.
I don't give a flying fuck how the admins make their money, as long as folks understand it's not about principled striving for the cause, praise jayzus!-- it's about the filthy lucre.
MADem
(135,425 posts)We're guests in their home. We either give them money or deal with their ads and the ad people give them money. That money allows them to run this site. It's not a mystery. The laborer is worthy of his hire.
If the links have been monetized, fine. I've never seen the link you're talking about--sure you don't have malware on your machine?
I hope they get enough to meet the bills and pay themselves. If you don't like that, you have options, you know. No one is holding you hostage and forcing you to post here.
Maybe you need to re-acquaint yourself with the TOS. They never claim to be affiliated with the DNC. This is a community of people who are Democrats, pretty much from the centrist to the left/progressive sphere. That "other" site is for people who can't fit into that Dem mold.
And it's not filthy lucre--unless the paycheck YOU collect to pay your rent, light and car note is also "filthy lucre." They have to eat, too, and support their families, and this is how they choose to do it.
I think it gets better every year--this is light years from the Bush Selection era in terms of how responsive and diverse the site is.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)My post was for those who think that the admins are running these sites 'for the cause' ®.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think that people need to get realistic about their expectations here. I'd certainly love to see the loudest complainers try to do better! I doubt they'll be able to, though!
kentuck
(113,319 posts)They need to hear different arguments, although not everyone can make them. I piss them off quite often, I am sure. But, I would not deny them their opinions. I can only offer them a different viewpoint. Otherwise, they are in a bubble of familiarity. And that cannot be good.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)It really makes us intolerant, scary one party rule, one religion rule, one viewpoint on anything rule, scary.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... making some pretty good arguments. You even get some civil discussion back (sometimes.)
kentuck
(113,319 posts)...is try to be civil. On occasion, I have lost my civility. Anymore, I just put out the facts as I know them and let them stand or fall on their own merits. The truth will eventually be victorious. It's all a matter of patience.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Actually, we can stop there too.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I have been there but don't spend much time there, but going there is my choice. If you don't go there how do you know how terrible it is? And if you do go there, why? And if you want to shut down Discussionist do you also want to shut down all the Right Wing sites?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)That's all just so fucking ridiculous I can't possibly respond any other way. But what the fuck, I'll try.
1) No, it won't end misogyny and racism on the internet. That's nirvana fallacy bullshit. It will, however, shut down at least one platform for this vicious, vile shit.
2) No, I don't want to shut down all right wing sites. What I would like is the supposed progressives who run both this site and Discussionist to stop making bucks off the vile hatred that gets spewed there and just shut the place down already.
Good God.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)And that "want to shut down all RW sites/won't eliminate misogyny and racism everywhere" combo was just pure derp.
Seriously, I think even you have to realize what a poorly-formed argument that is.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)about a "platform" or some other "poorly-formed argument". You failed to show how that harmed DU. A lot of people in DU are not harmed because THEY IGNORE the Discussionist. But some apparently get "harmed" every time they go to Discussionist. Well there are a lot of places on the internetz that a person can get "harmed" if they choose. I recommend they avoid those places.
The only way I see that the problems at Discussionist can cause harm to DU is when members drag the Discussionist problems into DU.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You really don't get how the owners of a supposedly progressive community creating a little no-holds-barred sandbox like Discussionist for racists and misogynists to play in harms DU?
Fine, I'll spell it out:
1) It makes us all look like a bunch of damn hypocrites to oppose racism and misogyny here, yet to not only tolerate but make money off it over there.
2) It creates a little haven for trolls and shitheads to organize and plan bullying against good DUers, and on a website owned by the same people as DU.
3) Misogyny and racism tolerated there, in addition to point two, lead good members here to feel they're not welcome and leave.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)You can't seem to have a discussion w/o trying to disparage. It's a tool to use when you don't have an argument.
Sorry but "Homey don't play that game."
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts) justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)Of purposes. The first being to try and keep the crap posts over there. Second, a good way to verify if a poster is a troll by comparing IP addresses.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Violet_Crumble
(36,174 posts)And for the rest of us, some participate, some like me posted a bit and then stopped, and others want it shut down. I don't get that last one. If I really dislike something I just don't go there. I don't demand it be shut down because I don't like it...
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)This is like television, and you mute the channel or avoid it, I guess. In my case, it's one more thing I don't have to remember.
Kablooie
(18,856 posts)I can't find any worthwhile discussions.
It's all ranting and raving with no one listening to anyone else.
William769
(57,331 posts) TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Although some people have been able to enforce some views on DU and make it a uniform voice on some issues, the world out there is a more interesting place and often suggests complainers just mind their own business.
still_one
(98,069 posts)closed because it is right wing, and owned by the same people who own DU.
That thinking does not represent true liberalism in the slightest
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)still_one
(98,069 posts)have the freedom to set up rules that follow a particular ideology be it left, right, middle, up, or down, and taken as a whole that I think can loosely be views as free speech, but only when taken as the whole set of forums which represent different views, though restricted to those specific forums.
At least that is how I look at it
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Trumad's demand that the site be taken down.
(It's almost 2AM here and I'm getting sleepy)
still_one
(98,069 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)that's tough to ignore.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)to something important because of gossip is kind of silly. Truth is that there's too much back and forth between the two, but I suppose that's inevitable.
Now, if they outed his real name, that would be a problem.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I'm not donating to DU any more as long as that site is up. As someone else mentioned, same owners so how do I know my money isn't going to support that cesspool.
Same admins... why do they provide a playground for that shit? It's bad enough that so much crap gets left up on this site due to the very imperfect jury system, but that siet is truly disturbing from the little I've seen.
Want to make money off that shit? Fine. You can do without mine.
still_one
(98,069 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)is called my prerogative.
still_one
(98,069 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Why are you trying so hard to be contrary? Does my position on this irritate you?
still_one
(98,069 posts)why is that a problem? Geez
All I said was I suspect that DU is now self-sufficient. Look at the way they changed the donation structure, it is more self-motivating rather than looking for a 1000 donors every quarter, or whatever it was
Does that comment bother you?
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I never said I was going to donate. I said I was not going to donate any more because of same owners running that cesspool.
Just reread everything, I think you have misunderstood what I said.
still_one
(98,069 posts)self-sufficient now that they do not depend on donations anymore
creeksneakers2
(7,639 posts)you still use their site.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)to "it's free enterprise."
Durrrrrrr
still_one
(98,069 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)How many times do we need to have a remedial course in freedom of speech?
"Freedom of speech", as in the First Amendment, refers to protection from government censorship of speech.
Read that: government. Not DU. Not Skinner. Not poor ol' NuclearDem. Government.
Good God, this shit is tiresome.
still_one
(98,069 posts)just bullshit what this rant is about period
"oh my dear God" " this shit is tiresome"
much hyperbole, enjoy your emotion
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Yet you are claiming that it is wrong for people to "vote with their wallet".
still_one
(98,069 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)"It's free enterprise!!" or that we hate free speech.
Are you going to argue that those are positive statements?
still_one
(98,069 posts)From the posts you provided. Those are simply opinions, and I do not tell people what they should or should not do
To explain my "free speech" comment, it is a broad definition that anyone can setup a forum based on a set of ideologies for that forum, and all the forums taken as a whole constitute free speech. Some forums lean to the left, some lean to the right, some lean to the far right, some lean to the far left, and in addition we have those forums that are in between. The right for all these forums to exist is an exercise in free speech, even though the individual forums themselves may restrict that free speech to a specific ideology
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts) JTFrog
(14,274 posts)I think it's my business to know.
And no, I'm not fucking joking. I have no time for you antagonistics today.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Guess what, I donate too .... I was never aware my money to keep this site running paid for diapers, gas, a house on the beach - anything. And I really don't care. I appreciate having a place to read and learn. Do you disclose to anyone you deal with exactly where your money goes? What if they HATE what you spend your/their money on? For all you know, Discussionist may have nothing to do monetarily with DU, and it's STILL no-one's business.
I support many other sites also, I sure as hell don't demand to know what they do with the small amount I give them.
still_one
(98,069 posts)
Go Vols
(5,902 posts)ask in ATA.
I run two sites that conflict,its about the $$$.
still_one
(98,069 posts)
PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)In this case there is a political aspect due to the site's content, but I've seen it on non-political sites too. The people who patron a site start to believe the creators/owners owe them something because they use their site. I've seen people get upset when the creator of a website works on other projects or doesn't spend every waking hour dedicated toward the old site. Skinner and the other admins do not owe anyone anything. They worked hard to create this platform and the communities based around it, and we should be grateful that they allow us to use it. I find it rather irksome that some people are actually demanding they shutdown their other sites and suggesting they are bad people for having them. Ugh!
Most of the people complaining about Discussionist seem to only be seeing the negative parts. There are plenty of long-time posters from here who post just as much as the conservatives. Also, a good portion of the truly hateful and out-of-line posts get hidden. It's extremely disingenuous for some to suggest it's akin to stormfront. It's not perfect, but it's one of the better open political boards I've been to.
still_one
(98,069 posts)there
still_one
(98,069 posts)started the discussionist, what does that have to do with DU?
DU is a forum that is for progressives, liberals, and Democrats. If another forum whose charter is something different that I don't agree with, I don't go there.
Aren't progressives supposed to believe in free speech? no one forces anyone to join or go to a forum they don't want to
Kaleva
(38,995 posts)The juries didn't agree with the alerts and things have calmed down since but not before I was told I was going to be watched and that I was a troll.
still_one
(98,069 posts)Kaleva
(38,995 posts)I occasionally go over to the other site to read and every so often, I'll post. But I'm here at DU most every day.
still_one
(98,069 posts)to the free republic site. That ideology is not my cup of tea
I will tell you what though, what does frustrate me, is not what some stupid forum professes, but a media who does not strive for accuracy or fairness.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)still_one
(98,069 posts)and Hillary also. However, I think I get your point. They are not coming from the same frame of reference as those with a progressive outlook.
Response to trumad (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Veilex
(1,555 posts)
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)I may use my same user name.
MrScorpio
(73,759 posts)Just when it started getting to be so much fun for me there.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,961 posts)I like the idea of a venue where both sides can exchange ideas. Understand, however, that DU is a site for liberals & progressives, and we're often rotten to one another. Why wouldn't you expect Discussionist to be a rougher game?
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)except to the extent that members on both places continue to complain about the other site. How about a moratium on discussionist bashing threads? If you don't like it, don't go there, and don't talk about it. That's a much faster way of severing the association than continuing to trash it here.
seaglass
(8,182 posts)Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)Is it associated with all the vile things that pop up as ads here?
Aside from inviting members here to also become members there, the owners have deliberately tried to keep the two sites separate. They asked members to take a different user name (requiring them to contact them and ask for the release of the DU name if they felt they couldn't make the change), they have taken different names over there (and two of them, at least, interact far more with with the community), they routinely tell people who ask about discussionist in ATA to ask the question on discussionist, and on discussionist they tell people to ask questions about DU here.
seaglass
(8,182 posts)Do the DU admins have control over the ads? They certainly have control over who posts on both DU and DI.
I couldn't care less about their efforts to keep the websites separate. There is a problem with misogyny on DU and it is welcomed on Discussionist - that is not in any way keeping with the principles of liberals, the Democratic Party or progressives. I am not asking for Discussionist to be shut down, I am asking that the revolving door between DU and Discussionist be closed. If a DUer is over on Discussionist making sexist/misogynist statements and/or supporting those who are then let them stay there but shut down their account here. There is no reason both websites need to be welcoming for that bullshit.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)No question.
I disagree that it is welcomed on Discussionist, any more than it is welcomed here. It exists there, as it does here, and the level the juries will tolerate which - in both places - is pretty atrocious. Given the different mix of population there than here, the misogyny will likely need to be far more express there than it is here before it is hidden, because only a portion of the population over there has ever had any education on the more subtle but equally harmful ways misogyny permeates our culture. That is to be expected - and I don't think it has settled out yet.
Discussionist is not a liberal or democratic party place - it was never intended to be. DU's position has long been (not just with discussionist) that your account here is dependent on your behavior here - not what you do anywhere else on the web. If you believe that is a bad position to take, the admins are the only ones who can change it.
The exception is, "I can only imagine one exception: If someone on Discussionist admits that they are trolling Democratic Underground -- and if we have rock-solid proof that they are in fact same person -- then we will ban that person from Democratic Underground as an admitted troll." If you believe people on discussionist have crossed that line, take the proof to the admins in ATA, and ask them to ban the troll.
Short of that, it's just chatter - and if it is chatter at a site you don't like, don't go there to hear it - or, better yet, help clean it up by alerting on it and serving on juries to hide it. Just like DU, people seem to have gotten tired of being smacked around by juries and have stopped alerting - or have gotten tired of serving on juries only to have the "I'm not hiding anything crowd" prevail - as they often do here. I'm willing to bet at least half of the posts you're concerned about were never even alerted on.
And - FWIW, DU does have control over the ads. The ads are initially auto-populated, but if they are offensive and the admins are made aware of them they can, and have, blocked specific ads (just as they can block specific posters). Recently, they have taken to telling people to buy a star rather than choosing to block the ads complained about.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)if i recall.
avebury
(11,110 posts)Discussionist then they are in fact associated and no amount of discussion will change that fact.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)hosted on separate servers. The admins use different handles there, and have repeatedly directed people on DU who are asking about discussionist (and vice versa) to go to the other site to ask their questions. And there are different rules on discussionist.
They have prevented people on discusionist from grabbing DU handles, in an attempt to prevent spoof accounts - but also encouraged DU members who also become members of discussionist to choose new handles in order to distinguish their activity there from their activity on DU.
The biggest association, at this point, is created by members of one site who insist on spewing crap about the other site. I don't run into Longhorn to complain about Olive Garden, just because they are owned by the same parent company. I complain to Olive Garden. If complaining at the Olive Garden doesn't work, I complain to the parent company, Darden.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And each company owned by the Koch brothers is not at all influenced by their ownership?
Would you like some oceanfront property in Nebraska? I'll sell it to you at a great price.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)don't wander into the sister restaurant you happen to like and pitch a fit about the other restaurant you don't like.
still_one
(98,069 posts)not go over there in it would just be another right will rag
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)
SixString
(1,057 posts)Maybe it's about revenue.
trumad
(41,692 posts)
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)The problem is that there are people there who were kicked off of here, and who actively use that site to plan revenge and malice against us. You can look at my journal and see things where redqueen left and they said "1 down, 4 to go." It is one thing to say "live and let live" when they are not crapping in my sandbox, but instead, they are actively trying to attack us. My beef is that Skinner, however lucrative Discussionist may be, started off with OUR money. I do not want to pay and then think that money will buy used to buy my enemies the sort of shiny new toys that we do not even get.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)their site is quicker.
In any case, why would I want to help people that are specifically trying to hurt DU members and brag about it?
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)that is a matter of opinion. I like it, but I have also heard complaints that it is garish. As for being quicker, that is because it has fewer features (i.e. less than DU).
As far as why you would want to help people trying to hurt DU members - you aren't. Once you pay your money to DU, the money is no longer yours. Suggesting that you should be able to control how DU spends its money is like your employer trying to tell you how to spend your paycheck. Once your employer pays you, you are free to give your paycheck (or some part of it) to entities which are actively competing with your employer and trying to put it out of business if you feel like it.
So - once the money is handed over to DU, it is no longer yours. Since membership doesn't require any payment, you are free to decide that you care enough about how they spend their money to avoid giving them any more.
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)" Once you pay your money to DU, the money is no longer yours. Suggesting that you should be able to control how DU spends its money is like your employer trying to tell you how to spend your paycheck."
OK, I will try to be polite, but this is LUDICROUS, and I will explain why.
DU has been allowed to exist because it served a certain need. Every so often, it begs for money, dragging out Grovel-bot, begging for money. DU's main pretext for getting the money that it knows it will need is that it will support the DU members. They make their money because there is a DU community here, one that invests their money to have a space to exist.
Now when you do something to actively HURT DU members, we have every right to say "hey! why did you do that?" If we can see the rape threat, or the comments like "1 down, 4 to go", then damn well they can, and what have they done? Even if it is a worded speech warning people that if they did not knock off the rape threats, it would say something, at least leave a clear border drawn that the rapeposters would wind up crossing "See, we told you not do to that and you did it anyway, goodbye."
If DU wants to be mealy mouthed and say "I gots yer money now, nyah nyah!" then they can learn that it is the corporations that are disposable, not the people, because the people can and will find other channels, however, I do not want that, because in this society, that just means that the right wing gets their comfy chairs and servants pouring them tea, while we are Nomads for anyone to kick about. If WE built this community, and damn right WE did, as Liberals, we need to be able to say "No, we will NOT hand over this land, and if you decided to burn it to make it useless, we will exact the highest possible cost from you."
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)4 threats. Each hidden 7-0. The member banned. That seems to me a relatively clear message. I'd like a stronger message - but I'd also like a stronger stance on DU about misogyny. The difference between the two sites is not really one of substance, it is more in how blatantly misogynists are permitted to get their message out. Since the discussionist crowd is less sophisticated in its understanding of misogyny, more blatant expressions will stand up to jury scrutiny. But on DU, the same sentiment is expressed by playing games with words, since DU juries will usually hide express misogyny, but also tend to say, "well I can't really read the mind of the poster."
As to the comments, "1 down, 4 to go," can you honestly say you have not seem similar comments here? Even similar comments about the same posters? Including some which survived juries?
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Can't. Take. My. Eyes. Off. Of. It.
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)Last edited Mon Sep 1, 2014, 01:53 PM - Edit history (1)
When I 1st joined I was very surprised at how censored DU was which I wasnt used to. Discussionist is an outlet for those who want to be a bit more free to debate and teach RWers a thing or 2. I dont have much time for it these days though. Once I start debating I cant seem to stop. ha!
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)kicked out. Discussionist is not DU - it is a separate site.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)because honestly, the reports I'm hearing from over there don't sound like much fun.
Violet_Crumble
(36,174 posts)No-one wanted to talk about Guided by Voices. My OP was deserted except for me. The rejection scarred me so badly I've never started an OP since and never will again. Thanks, Discussionist!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Vampire on Titus is a super weird album. Trip-py.
Violet_Crumble
(36,174 posts)I hadn't listened to Vampire on Titus for ages, so I listened to it again today at work, and it is a bit weird. Not as weird and hard to listen to as some of Lou Barlow's early stuff with Sebadoh, though...
Today's a brand new day, and I've recovered from the pain of having my Guided by Voices overtures rejected. I've got a surefire winner this time. I'm donning my raybans, tousling up my hair just a little bit, and I'm going to hit them with the Jesus and Mary Chain. No-one with any sense can reject this...
raven mad
(4,940 posts)I'm on new meds that cause nausea. I wasn't then; puked anyway.
I won't go back.
yuiyoshida
(43,359 posts)I can be called Racist names else where and that's more than enough.
pecwae
(8,021 posts)When I sign on to the net each morning I'm not automatically and against my will immediately directed to Discussionist and forced to read not only the posts, but each members profile before I can surf elsewhere. This is becoming quite meta here.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Do you?
mimi85
(1,805 posts)I'm beyond tired of the whining and GBCW posts. See you all after the elections. Adios and vaya con dios. Not that I believe, it's just a beautiful language.
If Discussionist is still around then, I have better things to do.
Cerridwen
(13,262 posts)and continues to evolve since the days when the owners were visited by the FBI(?) because of death threats made at DU. Since that time cyber-bullying/stalking, revenge porn, online threats of death and rape have started to result in criminal investigations and prosecutions.
Main article: Cyberstalking legislation
United States
Legislation geared at penalizing cyberbullying has been introduced in a number of U.S. states including New York, Missouri, Rhode Island and Maryland. At least forty five states passed laws against digital harassment.<63> Dardenne Prairie of Springfield, Missouri, passed a city ordinance making online harassment a misdemeanor. The city of St. Charles, Missouri has passed a similar ordinance. Missouri is among other states where lawmakers are pursuing state legislation, with a task forces expected to have “cyberbullying” laws drafted and implemented.<64> In June, 2008, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) and Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R-Mo.) proposed a federal law that would criminalize acts of cyberbullying.<65>
Lawmakers are seeking to address cyberbullying with new legislation because there's currently no specific law on the books that deals with it. A fairly new federal cyberstalking law might address such acts, according to Parry Aftab, but no one has been prosecuted under it yet. The proposed federal law would make it illegal to use electronic means to "coerce, intimidate, harass or cause other substantial emotional distress."
In August 2008, the California state legislature passed one of the first laws in the country to deal directly with cyberbullying. The legislation, Assembly Bill 86 2008, gives school administrators the authority to discipline students for bullying others offline or online.<66> This law took effect, January 1, 2009.<67>
A recent ruling first seen in the UK determined that it is possible for an Internet Service Provider (ISP) to be liable for the content of sites which it hosts, setting a precedent that any ISP should treat a notice of complaint seriously and investigate it immediately.[68]
18 U.S.C. § 875(c) criminalizes the making of threats via Internet. (emphasis added)
From wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberbullying#Legal_definition
If ISPs are held liable as may be a possibility in the UK, it may result in ISPs shutting down websites creating the most liability headaches. Since ISPs are business entities, I'm not sure they'll much care for 1st Amendment arguments that may not apply on a global stage.
I'm pretty sure the number of posts warning about the type of content presented on various sites will make it difficult for site owners to claim ignorance of the problem(s).
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Puglover
(16,380 posts)are currently thanking God for your sage advice.
I expect Discussionist to be history by the close of the stock exchange Tuesday.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)diseased, unclean human consciousness on parade in a toxic waste dump.
Like stepping into little Adolph's misanthropic mind when he was 12 yrs old.
I need a shower again.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)So don't go there.
Problem solved.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)trying to control dialogue on the internet is futile and 4chan has proven this many times.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)I can't even begin to say how utterly ridiculous it is to see "questions" asked here about why Conservatives do this, why RWers say that, why Republicans think whatever, and instead of, you know, ASKING a Conservative or RWer or Republican...getting an answer from them...people crawl out from the woodworking to make up shit based on what they think the answer is.
At least on Discussionist, people can ask a bona fide RWer, Conservative, Republican, and get an answer.
Many times I don't agree with it, but there are times when I can honestly say I can see where they're coming from and why they believe as they do.
Because they're human beings just like DUers are...many of whom, unfortunately, think the best way to deal with people they don't agree with is to dehumanize them.
kcr
(15,522 posts)Sadly, I don't think shutting down Discussionist is far enough. EarlG's victim blaming response is outrageous. The DU community should be in an uproar right now.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)and the poster banned. Same as would happen on DU.
(Had the poster had a lower post count, they would have turned into "name removed" posts - and vanished entirely, same as on DU.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)JaydenD
(294 posts)And it should be treated as such, especially by the admin here but instead they dish out contempt and blame on the victim just like sick real life. fucking shit shitery. Anyone wonder now why just adding the words sexist or misogyny to the terms was so out of line?
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Law enforcement officers and District Attorneys are the proper parties to deal with crimes because they are equipped and empowered to do so. This is not a matter that can be effectively and appropriately handled by the administrators of an internet discussion board. Crime victims should use the proper channels to achieve justice.
-Laelth
JaydenD
(294 posts)and apparently they think that banning a sock is justice enough for that particular crime.
Sorry, this is all wrong how this was handled by 'the authorities' here. But it explains a lot.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)And they did that. As I said above, forum owners and administrators are not equipped, nor are they legally empowered, to prosecute criminal suspects. I fail to see what more they can do.
-Laelth
JaydenD
(294 posts)there was blame. There was barely hidden contempt and there was: please, do you really have to bother us with this triviality? I will bet you a billion bucks I don't have if it was one of their own family members that got this pile of ofal they would not dismiss it so casually.
This is like a text book case of how crimes against women are handled.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)I suspect the attitude of our administrators is one of pure frustration. There's little more they can do. As I have argued elsewhere, criminal matters must be addressed by law enforcement officials and District Attorneys, as those are the only people actually empowered to handle criminal investigations.
All the same, I hear you. A little sympathy might have gone a long way in that post. I do not envy our administrators here.
-Laelth
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)It happened on discussionist. If the concern is that it is a crime, the proper thing to do is to go to the admins there (as several of us did to the admins here when we were were recipients of rape and death threats which were made here) and ask the discussionist admins to take the proper steps. If you aren't satisfied with their actions, then make a report to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
Trashing discussionist on DU because of a criminal act committed on discussionist by a now banned troll doesn't do anything to address your concerns about criminal activity.
And, for the record, I am appalled at the admin's repeated refusal to address the rampant misogyny here and fully support adding the words misogyny to the TOS. Because this is a site dedicated to progressives, I expect far more understanding and sensitivity to issues of racial, ethnic, religious, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, and disabilities.
My issue in this thread is dragging examples of individual bad behavior from discussionist over here, in an effort to trash discussionist. There are bad actors everywhere, and I certainly wouldn't want DU being judged by the most offensive of its posters. I think it is important to have a place for discussions where there is not uniformity of voices. It isn't everyone's cup of tea - and I'm not about to try to drag anyone over there who isn't interested in exposing themselves to broader ranging discussions. But by the same token, I am not happy with the regular attempts here to sabotage what I think is an important opportunity for a discussion that isn't just an echo chamber.
irisblue
(34,776 posts)Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)Here is a thread which has all the relevant links: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5472518
kcr
(15,522 posts)What is everyone complaining about? They shouldn't dress provocatively anyway.
See the problem? It's nice that it was hidden but that misses the point. The solution wasn't to create a board that attracts more filth like that to begin with, for one thing. The problem has only gotten worse since they started that cesspool of a website. The proper response isn't to shrug shoulders and proclaim it was hidden so there's no issue.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)On a fairly regular basis death threat guy posts long, extremely graphic death, dismemberment, and rape threats on DU (I have been the target of several - and believe me, they are far worse than the brief but unquestionably violent and disgusting posts on discussionist.)
DU responded, terminated his membership and (because he had fewer than 100 posts) wiped out his posts. But, according to your logic, that isn't good enough because DU attracts filth like that, and shrugging shoulders and proclaiming it was hidden isn't good enough. DU should be shut down.
Regardless of the intent of a discussion board, unless you are imposing background checks prior to joining, bad apples are going to join. My issue is trashing discussionist, which I think provides an important opportunity for broader conversations that need to happen, because (1) it exists and allows people from the entire political spectrum to post and (2) there are - and will always be - vile, evil people who join discussion boards. Discussionist responded appropriately - the same way DU responds to the death threat guy. It should no more be condemned and shut down for the actions of this jerk (and others like him) than DU should be condemned and shut down for the actions of DTG (and others like him) - or for the misogyny, racism, ableism, etc. that are daily fare on both places - it is just that you have to be a little more subtle to get away with it here.
kcr
(15,522 posts)I'm saying you don't tell a victim that they shouldn't complain about it because you did x,y,z. You certainly don't hint they bring things on themselves with their behavior!
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)My point is that no one is trashing DU and calling DU to be shut down because of similar behavior by individual members here, and similar responses of shutting the accounts of those individuals down.
I don't think EarlG's response was particularly helpful (I often find both his and Skinner's responses to misogyny less enlightened than I would like), but he didn't suggest she brought the threats on herself - what he suggest was that he didn't think complaints about it belong on DU. I agree with that - if the point of the complaints as it was in at least 2 threads - is to trash discussionist.
I would like the admins (both here and on discussionist) to be more proactive than they are when there are actual threats of violence. When they have been asked on DU, in response to death threat guy stalking DU members off-site - meaning he had some connection to who they were in real life, the admins pretty much threw their hands up. They indicated they had tried in the past, and had not been successful. I don't think that is a reason to stop trying, when there are specific threats.
But I don't think the admins failure to take further action is any more a reason to shut discussionist down (the topic of this thread) than it is to shut DU down.
And I don't think trashing discussionist belongs on DU (or vice versa). They are separate sites. If you want advice as to how to handle individual threats (whatever the source) - asking for community advice is completely appropriate (As BainsBane did). If you are using the bad actions of an individual member of discussionist to continue a campaign on DU to sabotage discussionist, that is where I draw the line.
kcr
(15,522 posts)I don't know how we would go on. We might as well burn the Constitution. But it still doesn't change the fact that EarlG's response was beyond awful and there's no excuse for it.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)Nope.
It wouldn't be the biggest loss to the world if DU was shut down either.
Both serve their purposes - just stay away from discussionist if you find it vile, and if you are personally threatened - or see someone else threatened - take appropriate action by taking it to the admins, and if they don't respond appropriately report it to law enforcement.
My point is that the actions of individual internet trolls, dealt with appropriately (hidden unanimously and banned) is not a reason to shut down a discussion board. If it was, DU should have been killed off years ago because of the actions of some of its most vile members.
kcr
(15,522 posts)Do you think they have the power to do so? ETA about the snark? Not sorry. I'm so angry about this that snark is the kindest way I can deal with it. Too bad.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)I spend a fair amount of my time in real life supporting and participating in opportunities for people to listen to others with different viewpoints. I do that personally by being out as a lesbian, even in conservative Christian communities, by speaking out as a rape survivor when I encounter rape culture, by being out as a person of faith among atheist progressives, by being out as a liberal among conservatives, and by spending 8 years in my faith community wrestling with whether or not they could take our marriage under their care - which they ultimately did. There are probably hundreds of individuals who are now accepting of LGBT individuals - who weren't once, as well as many who are more sensitive to rape culture, because of my interactions with them.
In a broader context, when I took a break from DU a few years ago it was to be an informal adviser to a local version of discussionist. That particular experiment failed (even though it still exists on the internet) because the admin's self-identification as creatives blinded them to the reality that they didn't have a clue how to make a discussion board easy to use. In short, they believed they were too sophisticated to take advantage of the kind of technology that DU and discussionist have - and refused to listen to those of us with experience who told them the board was unusable - and the few users they attracted mostly vanished.
Discussionist, on the other hand, has the technology - and an audience. So I think discussionist provides an opportunity for discussion with others with different viewpoints, and ultimately we need more of that. That doesn't mean making progress is always pretty - anymore than having to explain repeatedly on DU why mAnn Coulter jokes were offensive was pretty. And there will be real jerks, including jerks threatening rape and murder, just as there have also always been on DU. I think the opportunity is important. I find it offensive that people on DU who don't happen to like the idea of discussionist constantly feel the need to trash it, rather than just ignoring it.
I don't think individual members of DU have the power to shut it down - but I also don't think trashing discussionist is an appropriate GD topic. It is essentially a meta discussion about another site. And I don't like the emotional coercion of using the vile actions of a few individuals - which were promptly and appropriately responded to - to rile people up about the site.
kcr
(15,522 posts)Surely you don't think people objecting to rape threats don't want differing viewpoints allowed? You don't really mean you think that allowing an atmosphere of rape culture is essential for the flow of free ideas? I happen to think that free discourse will survive without Discussionist. DU has declined and I'm not saying Discussionist is fully to blame, but it certainly managed to thrive in the past without it.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)And the poster was banned - the exact same thing that would have happened on DU. (And I would not have been surprised, had the same thing occurred on DU, to have had a few dissenting votes.)
No one "allowed" that poster to make rape threats any more than anyone "allows" the death threat guy to make them here. And when he does, no one suggests that DU be shut down because all DU did was hide his posts and ban him. Repeatedly. As many as dozens of times a day.
Rape culture is an issue on both sites - and, again, no one is suggesting that DU be shut down because way too large a percentage of posters on DU either don't acknowledge it exists or are active participants in it (albeit usually more subtly than on discussionist).
As far as whether people objecting to rape threats want (or don't want) differing viewpoints - that is an entirely separate issue. But, FWIW, some have made it very clear they don't. Just skim any anti-discussionist thread and look for people making comments about how they hear enough right wing garbage in real life and you'll find a healthy overlap with the people in these threads complaining about rape threats. There's nothing wrong with not wanting to spend time online with people with differing views - but just because you (or they) don't want to isn't reason to agitate to shut down another site designed to accommodate differing views that responded exactly as DU would have to rape threats.
There are very few places with robust discussion software which are dedicated to broad ranging discourse, with a significant population base. That is a significant opportunity which should not be thrown away merely because it isn't perfect fewer than 4 months after it opened its doors. DU has been around considerably longer than that - and it is still far from perfect.
kcr
(15,522 posts)For one thing, the poster would have been banned for the threat. That does make a difference. I don't care if the jury voted to hide a post that can be clicked on and viewed anyway. That doesn't impress me no matter where it happens. If I'd been on that jury I would have voted to hide it too but I certainly wouldn't have made an effort to pat myself on the back for it. Yay, I made the decision any decent human being would participating in a meaningless system so some can pretend it's doing something. Woo.
No, the difference is the guy was banned for being a sock. And admin gave a dismissive response to the victim. Discussionist is a pit and its existence affects DU.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)which can be clicked on and viewed here as well. The only reason that that particular troll;s posts can be revealed is that he had enough prior posts so that his last 12 hours of posts weren't wiped out along with his existence. Exactly the same as here. You really think there aren't people here who wouldn't pat themselves on the back - or even vote to leave some of those posts? If so, you are fooling yourself.
As for why the poster was banned - the reason for banning posters on DU doesn't always state exactly why they were banned, either. DTG - whose threats are even more violently explicit (warning - major triggers) than The Doctor's were is always banned as a "troll" or "repeat troll" - even when (as has happened) he tracked members of MIRT IRL and threatened them in places completely unrelated to DU. He did not track me off of DU, but I was the target of several screeds on DU which were nearly identical to the one I've linked to. Even when it has been that extreme, the ban message is NEVER expressly because he made rape and death threats.
As for being dismissive take a stroll through ATA and look at Skinner's responses to people complaining about misogyny or homophobia - or about being stalked or bullied - and tell me with a straight face that his responses aren't every bit as dismissive.
You may have opinions about whether that is how things should be handled, but I see no significant difference between discussionist and DU.
The only reason Discussionist impacts DU, or vice versa, is because individuals on each site keep poking at individuals on the other site - or at the other site in general.
kcr
(15,522 posts)I said it in another thread. Should I be impressed that that's even a limit for some posters at Discussionist? I'm not. What, do they want a cookie for being a basic human being? Maybe if they paid more attention to the atmosphere that creates posts like that, they wouldn't have to vote to hide them. The fact that the post was hidden doesn't magically make things okay. The fact that posts get hidden here too just means that this place has the same sucky system that the one over there is modeled after. But this place isn't quite the raging right wing pit that that one is. It does still have some redeeming qualities.
Ms. Toad
(36,194 posts)But I've just linked you to the text that has been posted on DU hundreds of times, that is several times worse than the four that were hidden. If it is the atmosphere that is creating posts like that, then what does that say about DU?
Direct your ire where it belongs - at the threatening individuals. But stop using the actions of an individual, which were universally condemned, to trash the site that condemned the actions.
kcr
(15,522 posts)It's never okay to do that anywhere at any time. Absolutely there is a problem here at DU. The solution wasn't to create another website and allow the very people who create that problem to basically have free reign. It's only made the problem worse.
Like, Discussionist is better cuz you don't hafta worry about censorship and stuff. Yup! Buncha nags around here.
TBF
(35,056 posts)I have found him supportive in the past so I would like to read that for myself.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)But here's the link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5471853
-Laelth
kcr
(15,522 posts)She brought it here? I don't know any other way to interpret that but blame. And shrugging it off as hey, it was hidden is dismissive.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)In addition, I suspect she was actively looking for it. That doesn't diminish its vulgarity and offensiveness, to be certain, but the offender was banned very promptly, and I fail to see what more the administrators could have done. As I have argued elsewhere, criminal matters must be addressed by law enforcement officials and District Attorneys, as those are the only people actually empowered to handle criminal investigations. It's too much to ask our administrators to create justice in the world when they lack the power to create said justice.
-Laelth
kcr
(15,522 posts)These aren't two completely different, unaffiliated sites, as much as some want to pretend otherwise. There is a lot of overlap.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)And a long time in coming.
It's a business. Don't like it, don't patronize it. Simple as that. I barely post on DU anymore because as someone said the other day; "any post that actually has substance sinks like a stone and this drama filled argle bargle rules." And Discussionist is not my cup of tea. At all.
The filth that was posted over there was dealt with in short order. And the author PPRed. And it will sign up again. Although I have huge issues with the jury system in that particular case it worked and worked well. No one forced anyone into dragging that ugly crap over here.
kcr
(15,522 posts)Admin could do something about that. Not only did they choose not to, but they make decisions that make it worse. When DU started people wrote articles that they posted on the front page. They had Hate Mail on a regular basis. GD and LBN had more substance than you knew what to do with. It's a shame.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)a lot smarter then myself.
Now I find myself laughing more then anything else.
kcr
(15,522 posts)I'm sure I wouldn't come back if I just discovered it today.
Blue_Adept
(6,446 posts)This place was a treasure back in 2001-2003 in dealing with the way the world seemed and what was going on. Now it's scarier here than what I'm seeing in the real world. Feels like my time is best spent elsewhere.
FWIW I don't see victim-blaming there.
If BainsBane was threatened she is the victim. I don't see anyone blaming her.
boston bean
(36,733 posts)It is exactly what happened.....
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Your wish came true on that one.
-Laelth
TBF
(35,056 posts)and not a cent to DU until it does. Folks from that site also need to be reported to local police by the people they are threatening.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)missing something.
I don't have anyone on Ignore over there and have not seen any threats.
The only really vile stuff I saw was in someone's profile last night. I'm not a spring chicken, and have seen lots of nasty, and that is/was about the worst I've ever had the displeasure of reading.
The anger behind it is truly frightening, but I didn't see where the person made any real threats.
Are people being threatened by PM over there?
TBF
(35,056 posts)so far I have asked to see EarlG's links and from what I see he is not victim-blaming. In my opinion.
If BainsBane was threatened (which I have no reason to disbelieve as I have always found BB to be honest) than I think action needs to be taken by the admins.
At the very least I'd like assurance that any money made off DU donations is not co-mingled with the proceeds of Discussionists. But if they truly are making rape threats over there it is hard for me to support the site even existing. Full disclosure: I have no account over there. I am annoyed enough with the right-wingers who post here without supporting their efforts over there.
Response to trumad (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Laelth
(32,017 posts)
-Laelth
kcr
(15,522 posts)Response to kcr (Reply #221)
Name removed Message auto-removed
kcr
(15,522 posts)Their fault for going there. Absolutely no affiliation whatsoever between these two sites. No, sir!
catbyte
(36,525 posts)shit like I saw I would visit Freeperville or Stormfront. It is beneath DU.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)As a Liberal, I don't agree with the majority of beliefs on the "Right", but I believe they have a right - as long as they keep it civil - to say what they want to say and be heard (and rebutted, accordingly).
Laelth
(32,017 posts)I had no idea I was conversing with so many authoritarians. It's depressing, honestly.
-Laelth
TBF
(35,056 posts)folks over there I think we need to talk about that. Rape is a serious threat and should not be tolerated by any humane people.
Thanks, btw, for providing the link in that other thread. I read EarlG's responses and do not see "victim blaming" there. I appreciate you pulling those up because my personal interactions with Skinner and EarlG, though very limited and mostly on MIRT, have convinced me that they are not promoting misogyny on this site.
I don't post on Discussionist because I get enough headaches from the "third way dems" on this site.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Nobody is arguing that rape threats aren't serious. My point is that there's very little our administrators can do about them. The offending poster was banned (and very quickly, at that). The jury system worked, even at Discussionist where there are a lot of right-wing posters.
Forum owners and administrators are not equipped, nor are they legally empowered, to prosecute criminal suspects. I fail to see what more they can do. Criminal prosecutions must be handled by law enforcement and District Attorneys because they are the only people empowered by law to handle such matters.
-Laelth
TBF
(35,056 posts)and make the statement that they are willing to do so.
I am waiting for them to answer whether the two sites function autonomously in terms of funds, ie I do not want my donations to DU to support Discussionist.
I did think EarlG's response was good. I didn't have a problem with that.
Starry Messenger
(32,376 posts)You're an authoritarian. Why even have laws? Awful, oppressive things.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Nobody argued that rape threats aren't serious and that they don't have serious implications.
There's very little, however, that our administrators can do about them. The jury system worked on Discussionist. The offending poster was banned very quickly. I don't think it's fair to ask our administrators to do more than that because they are not empowered to do so. Criminal matters must be handled by law enforcement officers and District Attorneys because those are the only people empowered to handle such matters.
Calling for the elimination of an entire website just because one objects to the speech of a single, now-banned poster? That's authoritarian.
-Laelth
Starry Messenger
(32,376 posts)Have they ceased blaming the victim, instead offering understanding? Have they banned the guy who said women were unfeeling gorillas who craved rapey men?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)investigation.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)They should comply with any lawful requests, but handing over UPS requests to anyone isn't okay. What if someone I pissed off asked for my ISP, not okay.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Frankly, I knew it was someone who had no idea where I lived, my real name and had no way to do what he was threatening. I wrote him back with my usual impeccable good manners and saw within minutes he'd been MIRTED. He must have gotten to someone else who reported him. What good would it have done to demand his ISP. Especially from Canada ..... they would have tossed it in file 13 upon reading it. Seriously .... what should I, as a woman with the same rights as any other have done? I don't believe I'm alone in getting these pm's, by far. I think the troll at Discussionist was taken care of in record time by 28 people who thought he was disgusting and as he was unable to post further, he could do nothing but rant on his own profile wall and delude himself into thinking people would read it and be terrified at his vileness. I honestly don't understand what more people expect should have been done.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)to shut down the right to speak freely in our democracy even if we don't agree with what's being said.
How are we ever going to learn what the other side is being told or believe?
How will we be able to learn to converse with them in the hope of correcting the damage corporate media has perpetrated on them?
I believe that sites like HuffPo - which is similar to Discussionist in the makeup of members - have helped many Republicans make the switch and they voted Democratic Party in 2008 and 2012 because they were given correct information by Liberals.
We can make a difference, however slow, so I'm with you, Laelth.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)That trait is common on both the left and the right.
I agree. It's depressing.
-Laelth
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)This is one where people who were kicked off of DU are using that site to attack people on DU, to get REVENGE, to CONQUER, to destroy. Yes they can go to other sites, heaven knows there are plenty for the right wing, but why should the same people who made their living off of us be allowing them to ATTACK US?
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)kindly looks at the Bains bane thread where these fine oppressed right wingers threaten to RAPE several DU members.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025472518#post171
(warning, nasty language)
"24. Those women need a good dicking.
I'm sure if most of the feminazis on the site got fucked by a few dudes with huge cocks, they'd be happy and wouldn't troll anymore.
Hell, I'd do BainesBane and redqueen at the same time. Both of them have nice tits I'd love to cover with my man goo. "
Now, maybe Isis may consider threats of Rape to be proper politics and freedom of speech, but we don't.
And no, maybe we cannot ban this site, but again, if my money, money I was going to buy a star membership with, is going to be used so that Skinner can maintain a safe haven for these people to literally threaten people with rape, I cannot allow a penny, period.
At the very least, why cannot Skinner make a specific damned policy not to allow threats of rape? Not even violence, as we all know everyone in politics loves to fantasize about revolution. But RAPE is not revolution, dammit.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)and his posting privileges revoked. http://www.discussionist.com/?com=profile&uid=100295&sub=trans
The Discussionist is fairly new and the rules still need to be tweaked here and there. A good rule to implement would be to forbid any members to post about DUers negatively, which can otherwise earn you immediate tombstoning and all traces of you are disappeared - just like HuffPo had been doing until they instituted the necessity to use a Facebook account in order to post nowadays.
Unfortunately, there might be a few more like that RW-scrotem posting there, but I still don't believe the site should be shut down. Instead, we should weed out the filth like that poster, revoke their posting privileges, remove all their posts, and permanently ban them from making another account.
Also, as you can see in his list of posts, he didn't start posting like the misogynist p.o.s. that he is until Monday Sunday, August 31, 2014 - which was consequently the same day his posting privileges were permanently revoked and his posts hidden.
On a personal note, I would rather see all his posts removed, though. "Hidden" only means people can still click on them, "Show" and then read them, but I don't agree that Discussionist should be dissolved. If Republicans can maintain a degree of civility when discussing - and some there actually can - then I'd like to read what they have to say.
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)and if this is the start of a trend, kudos to whoever made that call. In all fairness though, I wish it did not take raising a stink to do it, some things are common sense. I
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)It would help if they had community moderators there - people who have a good standing with DU since Discussionist is a DU sister site. That would go a long way in keeping things civil there, imo.
I really don't get why people come to DU to talk about other discussion groups, whether it be discussionist, FR, or any other.
Don't DUers have thoughts of their own, and things to say on their own, besides gathering to gossip behind others' backs?
Because that's what it's like. It's juvenile. And it's ubiquitous. It happens at discussionist, too.
It's simply another reflection playing out...people who get their identity, security and esteem from a clan/klan/gang/party/clique/tribe/or whatever, and maintain it by hating/attacking/putting down the "other."
It's a game. Let's see who we can attack today, and let's do it safely from within the walls of our group, so that we don't have to deal with their response. It makes us feel righteous. We put ourselves up by putting others down, just like an American middle school.
Does anyone have anything of substance to say today that is not just a repetition of what someone else said, or an attack of an "other?"
TBF
(35,056 posts)that is why it is an issue. Personally I want to know whether the budgets are completely separate - I don't want my donations to DU supporting that filth.
YMMV.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)I'm aware of a few other things as well:
1. DU is a censored site. It always has been. There are controls on the conversation. DU owners have usually, but not always, been liberal about keeping those controls to a minimum in an effort to promote healthy discussion.
2. If discussions at DU are to be more than an echo chamber, they have to be transportable. They have to be able to be taken to, and to stand up to, the opposition. Creating a site where that can be done is well within reason.
3. One of the reasons why some DUers participate at discussionist is because they can speak more freely there without DU's partisan censorship. Liberals/leftists who care about issues beyond party appreciate that.
4. There is filth to be found at DU, as well as substance-less fluff, lots of party propaganda, and still some interesting, substantive discussions. The same can be said for discussionist. All human groups reflect their members, and their is no pure, pristine group that has no flaws, no human ugliness.
5. If the point of discussion is to make your points well enough to actually make people think, you have to actually allow the opposition into the room to hear them. If you are going to engage your opposition, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR THINGS YOU DON'T LIKE. That's the way it works. The point is to use reason to drive your conversation, not emotion. That's how you make people think.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)are the best in the thread IMO.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)TBF
(35,056 posts)until folks are being threatened with violence. It's against the SOP here. Maybe Discussionist doesn't have such rules but I still don't want my donations supporting that site.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)there, just as it is here. This just exposes the flaws inherent in the jury system. Jurors who don't adhere to the TOS and allow threatening other members to stand should be removed from the jury pool. That would be a good place to start.
What it does NOT seem to have is an "ask the admins" to take the question to them.
TBF
(35,056 posts)I have never signed up over there because I have no interest in talking further with right wingers (I get plenty every day here in TX).
LWolf
(46,179 posts)It's good practice for keeping cool and reasoned in the face of right-wing bullshit, and I'm free to talk about issues without putting partisan disclaimers on my positions.
I spend more time here, but not a lot of time in either place now that the school/work year is back in full swing.
TBF
(35,056 posts)and I also appreciate the free speech issues. I don't really expect admin to take down the site but I do want some assurance that the projects are completely separate (ie not comingled funds). I'd love to see a statement on that from them. Obviously there are plenty of sites on the Internet I don't choose to frequent - or support monetarily. I would just put Discussionist in that category and move on.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)A jury I participated on last night voted to hide a personal attack that was mild in comparison to those that sparked some of the outrage. That's a good sign, a sign that there are enough there to start shutting down the stuff that goes beyond "free speech" whenever possible.
Does anyone have anything of substance to say today that is not just a repetition of what someone else said, or an attack of an "other?"
You just have to avoid GD to get that. I do most of my reading in other parts of DU to get my news and opinion. GD sometimes has interesting social discussion but it's usually just all sides yelling shrilly at each other.
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)and targeted for harassment from Discussionist. I would submit such concerns are far from juvenile. They are compassionate and demonstrate concern about other human beings.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)you need to shut a site down. We need to shut the terrorist down. Just my perspective.
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)but I think the idea if a jury allows something it is okay is problematic. There are currently a number of threads on that site targeting feminists on DU. That poster remains active, unimpeded. That is part of the climate that leads men like the Doctor believe it is acceptable to threaten women with rape.
I also think there is a difference between disagreeing with the OP about a solution to the problem and belittling his concerns, which is how I viewed your response to him. Since those concerns involve threats to my person, I can't help but take such reactions personally.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)I understand that, in the interests of democracy and free speech, and in managing a lot of posts, member participation is the way the site owners have chosen to moderate. I support the intent, if not the reality.
I also know from experience right here at DU that jury results vary widely and are often colored by juror bias. There doesn't seem to be much oversight in that process, ensuring adherence to TOS without bias. Not here, not there.
The posts you refer to? I think now, and I thought then, that anyone posting anything like that should be immediately banned. Permanently. I haven't been on enough to keep up; did that happen?
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)The person who is encouraging targeting of feminists on DU through repeated threads over these last few days has not been banned. Juries have allowed his posts to stand.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)with my vote. I'm not online enough to be called for many juries.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)most of the questions don't get answers.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)I am having a good time over there pissing off racist, misogynists, conservative assholes. You should lighten up and join the fight.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Don't go there if you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)when the same kind of shit was posted here (directed at seabeyond)?
trumad
(41,692 posts)Wow...
pintobean
(18,101 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)Didn't know you guys were that close.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)and I don't want any DUer to have to deal with that shit.
So, why weren't you calling for DU to be shut down when it happened here?
Maraya1969
(23,215 posts)
TeamPooka
(25,577 posts)
ColesCountyDem
(6,944 posts)sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)for the free and open discussion of ideas outside of academia, whatever those ideas may be, whether you like them or not. Both are threatened by censorship, and supporting that because one finds other ideas offensive or threatening is a very bad idea. DU already has a means of democratic censorship in place, and I don't even much support that, even though I know it is appropriate. If all you want to hear is the choir, go to church.
Response to trumad (Original post)
Inkfreak This message was self-deleted by its author.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Just curious, because why would you go to that site if you don't like it? And if you don't visit the site, like myself, then who cares?
TBF
(35,056 posts)I don't want my donations supporting that site. I'm not even sure I want to be associated with anyone supporting that site in any way.
You've crossed the line when you advocate rape. At least in my book. YMMV.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)I agree any site that does that crosses several lines. Did the owners say why they advocated such a thing?
I was under the false impression that the sister site had a DTG type troll that was nuked for advocating rape, much like DTG is here. I did not know the site or the owners were complicit and supportive of it.
I don't post there however so you will have to forgive my misunderstanding the matter. It is, to say the very least completely unlike the site owners to advocate such a thing and I am at a loss to explain or forgive what they allegedly did.
Logical
(22,457 posts)War Horse
(931 posts)But a basically left wing site creating what is bound, inevitably, to be a right wing site?
To each their own, I guess,
JohnnyRingo
(19,726 posts)...and it's up to the righteous few to censure their input.
Personally, I spend my days scouring internet forums demanding people take down the posts that offend me, but you'd be surprised how little progress I'm making in that endeavor. It's like people think they have the right to post something I find truly insulting. Enough already!
avebury
(11,110 posts)Discussionist is making me take a hard look at sticking with DU because they are owned by the same people. It makes you wonder if the concept of a liberal website is just a front for a way to make money.
Squinch
(54,555 posts)Maybe it was once, but it isn't now. It's about money in the pockets of the three administrators. And whether it comes from Stormfronters and Freepers or actual liberals is immaterial to them. And sadly, whether we like it or not, all of us who post on DU are complicit.
(I get why people aren't re-upping their memberships, but that doesn't do much. Just by posting, we are increasing their ad revenue and the interest quotient of their sites.)
mahina
(19,544 posts)Unfortunately, we don't all play nicely. Anyway, since they troll us here regardless, they come here already and will be exposed to alternative points of view without Discussionist.
I should add I've only gone there a couple of times, so my perspective is from a very limited view.
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)I do believe the idea that anything goes if a jury allows it has to be rethought. The admins could do a great deal to address the problem by banning some of the people actively working to disrupt DU and targeting women here.
They did ban someone today, but I'll let that person tell the story. The person was not one of those engaged in targeting women on this site.
Response to BainsBane (Reply #301)
Post removed
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)I have not posted threads saying go get those people. I have posted views on women's rights. How is it that people who claim to be liberals or on the left find speech so threatening? How is it that you see difference of opinion as disruptive? How is it possible to describe opinions on social, cultural, and political issues as worse than threats of violence?
That portion of the DU base is clearly in the minority. Not everyone is threatened by equal rights. Not everyone seeks the oppression of the many for the benefit of the few. Some care deeply about issues of equality and social justice. Many do not see feminist ideas as worse than violence. Some do not believe difference of opinion warrants threats of rape and death.
BainsBane
(55,670 posts)No one who thinks women expressing their views of feminism are more disruptive than threats of rape can rightfully call themselves a liberal or a feminist.
I just joined and this is what my very first post goes to? shut it down, really. I guess that's just the kind of day I'm having. I hope it does not get shut down just yet cuz I think I might like it here
CaliforniaPeggy
(153,146 posts)DU is not Discussionist. Not by a long shot.
DU will be going on for many years, I think.
Welcome to DU!
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)DU trolls weren't generating enough ad revenue. So now not only do we have to tolerate open bigotry here, but we have to occasionally be caught downwind from that place, too.
Calista241
(5,621 posts)On some additional revenue streams. I don't see anyone here offering up to pay for people's mortgages and college funds. I personally would like to continue using DU, and if that means the owners have a side business, who cares?
I seriously doubt they started Discussionist to preach hate and dilute DU.
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)And yes, I truly believe they did not. Indeed, the probably thought they could make a sandbox for the nasty children to play in, make money, and keep our sandbox clean. The problem is, once they realize that is it out of control, they need to take steps. Any chef can have an accident and start a fire in the kitchen, but if I do not see fire extinguishers being taken out, I will not eat at that place again, even if it has four Michelin stars.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)they fired Grovelbot because they were no longer in need of the donated funds. So that doesn't make sense. If they are in need of money, they could see if Grovelbot would be willing to come back.
Calista241
(5,621 posts)Do you expect them to admit on a public forum that their business plan failed?
The reality is that none of us know the financial situation of the company that runs these two sites. Ad revenue from Discussionist may mean continued survival for DU. Or, the admins could be assholes and want to give voice to those not welcome here.
In either case, I'm not going to demand they sacrifice their livihoods out of a declaration of purity to our cause.
mdbl
(5,909 posts)It seems like every time I go there I run into a bunch of imbeciles and just put them on ignore. After a while of doing that, I noticed I don't see many posts there anymore lol
Hari Seldon
(154 posts)Discussionist was designed to be a place where trolls would go to INSTEAD of disrupting DU itself by constantly creating new user names.
The tone of the conversation at DU has improved markedly since discussionist came along to piper away the trolls
Its also a good place for former DUers to learn how to be civil, and to not poke their noses into conversations in which they don't belong.
IrishAyes
(6,151 posts)and then only so I could legitimately shout to the admins: SHUT THAT POS DOWN!!!!
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)and make hay outta how the poor little lefties tucked tail and ran from those far bigger in cerebral size.
Your silly demand is similar to insisting that Palin or Limbaugh be shut up. All rightwingers are the best witnesses for their own prosecution, and rightwingers there are serving in that same role for as long as it lasts.
The worst they try to make it the more it is an imperative that they be shown to be the mental dwarfs that they are. It's not the fault of those of us that enjoy showing them that the rest of you aren't up to the task for whatever reason.
trumad
(41,692 posts)stupidicus
(2,570 posts)I chose it better than a decade ago so as to provide rightwingers with an easy out once they ran outta ammo.
It seems to work like a charm regardless of the ideological persuasions of those short on material.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)I guess they haven't noticed the big yellow banner on DU's homepage directing traffic to that site.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)But I don't click on them. Are people that gullible?
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)But yea, we probably shouldn't be stupid enough to click on it.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)Are opposing viewpoints THAT scary and dreadful?
You can't just say "I'm not into this." and log out, never to return?
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)but, when there is a website that becomes devoted to attacking you personally, maybe you'll understand. The threats are crimes. The admin don't seem to care. They don't want any accountability. They don't want people over here knowing what an ugly cesspool they have created. Because THIS site has been dedicated for years to fighting what is going on at the OTHER site. Both sites owned by the same people. This site has always been big into activism. We call out vile right wing websites here all the time. We call for boycotts of websites, radio shows, tv shows, businesses, etc. all the goddamn time for creating and fostering atmospheres of HATE. We shine the light on that shit for the whole world to see. Now that that the owners of THIS site have stooped to financially benefiting from the HATRED, don't expect us to shut up. They are trying to shut us up. But our voice will carry further than their reach.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)I see a lot of people taking about it but no one seems to be able to tell me what happened there.
We just had a holiday weekend and I was cooking. I don't live on these sites. I have a life.
You're telling me that someone specifically called you out and said they were going to rape you? How would they even know who you are in real life? And the Discussionist people let it stay? I find that hard to believe.
There are some serious trolls over there but I don't think anyone would let violent threats stand.
Autumn
(47,484 posts)create another revenue source? No one has to go there.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)I like it there a lot better than here now. All the eggshell walking you have to do here has made this place pretty lame. This was a much better forum ten years ago.
They aren't shutting it down on your say so that's for sure. Why not come over and engage with the right wingers? Sure they can be infuriating with their willful ignorance and boneheaded trolling but it's also fun and in some cases informative.
But if you don;t like it you should probably just stay out. Why try to ruin it for everyone else?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)If I want to argue with right wingers, I have plenty of other opportunities.
pscot
(21,044 posts)r by aliens.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Or so accommodating.
anti partisan
(429 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Streets, schools, federal buildings, even airports named after them if these disclosures happened in say... 2006.
The common perception at DU is that their actions made President Obama look bad because this shit happened on His watch.
anti partisan
(429 posts)bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)It can be quite entertaining. It's like messing with right wingers on FR without getting banned.
One thing I have noticed - there are some hard core women-haters there, all refugees from here. I'm talking VIRULENT hatred of women. I didn't notice it here in the past, but I pretty much stayed in the Breaking News forum and didn't realize how bad they were.
There are maybe two or three conservatives there that are okay, but it disappoints me that they don't speak up when their more whacko brethren start with the hate speech. I've noticed that about Republicans before; they are reluctant to criticize their own, even when they clearly need to be criticized.
Response to trumad (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Jasana
(490 posts)is not getting any more donations from me until that rape shit (and the high fivers) are totally cleaned out. I will not take any chance whatsoever that a penny of my money goes to supporting MRA free speech. This is my line in the sand.
DonCoquixote
(13,797 posts)when anyone, and I do not care if this "man" is some 18 year old college student , a female even (stranger stuff has happened), in real life, makes someone think they should rape someone, it is a crime. It's one thing to do porn, which is not reality any more than Mickey Mouse is, but when you target a live, actual person for rape, that is a crime, and it goes well beyond free speech.
stonecutter357
(12,819 posts)
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)There are far too many here who simply spout cliches, but never bother to read in depth. It's not a DU thing, of course, but it's happening everywhere, including at DU.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)contingent of rethugs...
jambo101
(797 posts)My impressions
I find the site mostly leftwing,
the few trolls that are normal in any forum are dispatched in short order.
Righties are taken to task for their beliefs.
Being a Liberal i have no problems with the site and actually like it.From my short time there it seems a fair and balanced discussion forum.
i'm just not getting why so much animosity toward the site.
I am getting the impression there was a major power struggle here on DU and discussionist was born as a result.
I'm still trying to figure out what a HoF is as whatever it is seems to be pertinant in the discussion.
Heidi
(58,237 posts)It is often (and misguidedly, in my opinion) cited as the source of all that ails DU.
Here's the SOP of the HoF forum:
The History of Feminism group serves as a safe haven to discuss, and learn the history of feminism. Apply the lessons of historical and modern day feminist struggles to current issues and events that impact women. This group will also serve as safe haven for women (and supporters of feminism) to openly and honestly discuss and learn how the patriarchy affects women individually and collectively.
jambo101
(797 posts)Can i deduce all the guys went and developed Discussionist?
Heidi
(58,237 posts)jambo101
(797 posts)Being a guy on a forum apparently meant for feminists..
seaglass
(8,182 posts)jambo101
(797 posts)
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)And don't read the posts in it if you're "uncomfortable."
jambo101
(797 posts)And a regular post/topic. This topic is about shutting down another forum, is it a HoF topic?
And whats an SOP?
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)It's a thread in GD (General Discussion), so it's a general topic.
HoF threads are posted in the HoF group.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1255
If you're on the "Lastest" page, you can see if the thread is in the HoF group (or any other group) by reading the line above the thread link. Here's an example from the Latest page (a thread in the Interfaith Group):
Interfaith Group
Parliament Of The World's Religions To Host 2015 Conference In Salt Lake City
By hrmjustin - 11:34 AM
And the SoP is a "Statement of Purpose" - like a mission statement for each area. Every forum and group has a unique SoP, which can be found on the main page of each forum/group, under the "About this Forum" or "About this Group" button.
Any user can read threads in any DU group, and users can "subscribe" to a group (as a way to easily find new threads under your "My Subscriptions" tab above). Anyone can post OPs or replies in a group, unless they are blocked by the group host. Blocking typically occurs of a member doesn't follow the SoP of a particular group, though group hosts have authority to block anyone for any reason.
Heidi
(58,237 posts)HoF's SOP clearly says that supporters of feminism are welcome there. You're a supporter of feminism, aren't you?
jambo101
(797 posts)Havent really given the subject much thought. In as much as i'm for equal rights and pay for women, and i dont think a woman should be in any way inferior to a man just because she's a woman. That said if this forum is basically for women i'd feel rather odd trying to debate topics on womens issues.
At 500 posts i still feel like a noob as there seems like a lot is going on behind the scenes of this forum that i know nothing about.
Heidi
(58,237 posts)It's for supporters of feminism--female OR male--to discuss issues related to women's struggles for equality. And anyway, you asked what HoF was, and I told you. I wasn't trying to force you (or even encourage) you to jump in there. I don't post in HoF myself, but I do appreciate all that the HoF regulars contribute to DU.
P.S. Everyone here was a "noob" at one time.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)DU is definitely NOT "basically for women" - it's for anyone and everyone (politically left-leaning, that is).
DU has several main forums, and a whole bunch of small interest groups, a few of which are geared toward feminism (look under Topics on the left for a complete list).
You can have a perfectly wonderful time on DU and never discuss or debate a single topic on women's issues (though many such topics are highly relevant to everyone).
jambo101
(797 posts)You've clarified a number of issues,
I now assume this "close discussionist down" topic is within the HoF group of topics..
Be aware noobs are going to have no idea what this HoF and SOP stuff is all about when it comes up in general conversation on the forum..
seaglass
(8,182 posts)response to you?
Here is another good place for asking questions:
Welcome and Help forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1256
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12569244
(despite my giving him the link to the HoF group yesterday).
seaglass
(8,182 posts)some reason.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)jambo101
(797 posts)I noticed the topic "close discussionist down" topic title in the latest threads section and as i'm a new member at discussionist i thought i'd ad some comment on the topic so i blindly waded in not knowing it was a HoF issue with a SOP..
Sorry for the blunder..
PS. went to the lounge and this group of HoF topics is not jumping out at me,,where is it?
Thanks
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Frankly even DU isn't liberal anymore
TheSarcastinator
(854 posts)If you don't like what someone is saying, you must force them to be quiet and take away the medium used to disseminate the heresy in the first place.
The are a LOT of Authortarian-Americans, and many are here at DU.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)