I have a suggestion that might help us evaluate posts and reply. Just a thought. Pros and Cons. [View all]

[usaf-vet]

At times like these, with strong feelings on both sides. I think it would help (at least me) to look at replies to, say... my posts.

If next to the poster name, for example, usaf-vet was followed by the year they joined DU, something like one of the examples below.
usaf-vet (2008)
usaf-vet (08)
usaf-vet 08
usaf-vet 2008

One of these would give me and others additional information to judge what and who is saying it.

I don't know how to judge posts, particularly replies, when the post or reply comes from someone like this.
DU-xyz (392) might suggest to me that this new member just joined and quickly built a 392 post over a few weeks.
Maybe they are legit, with no particular agenda, and have been members since 2022. They visit and post infrequently.

Or maybe it is this scenario:
DU-xyz (392) 2024 or Du-xyz (392) 2019

Right or wrong, I would be respectable to both, but given the times, I would be more cautious with this OP poster DU-xyz (392) 2024; for example, is this a Putin bot (employee), or as we all should know, Trump has no limits to how low he would go to cheat, threaten or lie using made up "facts."

Case in point, it appears to me we have two counterpositions about the election results. One would like to review (examine, audit) the vote totals, especially in the swing states. The other position is that we lost. Let's move on; there is no evidence of cheating. What is their true agenda?
There is evidence that Trump will do what he must to stay in power. I think DU members should agree with those basic facts.

I've been here since 2008, and let me make this point: Maliase, Omaha Steve, RandySF, and PCIntern, to name a few, are known entities. Newcomers need to be respected but tested over time.