The DU Lounge

MH1

(18,547 posts)

7. I did not see anything like that. Maybe it depends on what rule is selected?

Thu Jun 23, 2016, 08:12 PM

Jun 2016

In the two juries I did there was just the box stating the rule and asking if I was willing to enforce it, then the one with the post and the 4 options.

I was able to expand the posts leading to the alerted post and felt that was context enough in the two cases I had. Maybe once I do a few more I'll see some where I share your issue. It does seem possible that the context could be insufficient. But I think in that case you just go with your gut based on what you can see.

Both of my cases so far were "close, but ..." One went one way, one the other. I took some time deciding, but oddly, afterward I decided I was definitely right in my choice.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do you like the new jury system? [View all] trof Jun 2016 OP

Undecided. Only had 1 to date, it's sort of bare and spare. But after DU1 when I UTUSN Jun 2016 #1

I don't think I'm allowed to reply. trof Jun 2016 #2

I'm missing some info here: not "allowed to reply" - be*CAUSE*?!1 UTUSN Jun 2016 #17

Since the changeover it seems that I get into trouble... trof Jun 2016 #33

meh, you have one of the all time familiar DU handle/names so must not be that much trouble!1 n/t UTUSN Jun 2016 #35

Not really. I need more context to make better assessments. femmocrat Jun 2016 #3

Je ne sais pas. trof Jun 2016 #4

I did not see anything like that. Maybe it depends on what rule is selected? MH1 Jun 2016 #7

I didn't see where I could expand posts leading to the alert. 2theleft Jun 2016 #8

Yes, it shows the op and the posts leading to it, collapsed. MH1 Jun 2016 #9

Thank you! That will help a lot. n/t 2theleft Jun 2016 #10

However, if it's an OP, there's nothing to expand. kentauros Jun 2016 #23

I think Skinner addressed that in an ATA post. MH1 Jun 2016 #38

I don't read the ATA, so it's not something I would have known. kentauros Jun 2016 #43

I specifically asked that question and Skinner insisted knowing the group wasn't important riderinthestorm Jun 2016 #50

I have twice had to withdraw because I could not interpret without sufficient context. hlthe2b Jun 2016 #16

You get that box if the alert was not close to being a violation, in yor opinion. Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2016 #18

Thanks! femmocrat Jun 2016 #24

I got it also, a couple of times. woodsprite Jun 2016 #52

I think it's great. MH1 Jun 2016 #5

I like the way it gives more choices liberal N proud Jun 2016 #6

Undecided. There are some good features. Not knowing who has been alerted on will help prevent Arkansas Granny Jun 2016 #11

Its alot more streamlined than before Ruby the Liberal Jun 2016 #12

I agree NJCher Jun 2016 #54

Not since I discovered that the admins are disappearing post removed OPs... demmiblue Jun 2016 #13

I've only done a couple, but I think they made some good changes. ohnoyoudidnt Jun 2016 #14

I think there are some positive elements, but I do feel a bit used after serving with no feedback hlthe2b Jun 2016 #15

I served on one jury and my reaction avebury Jun 2016 #19

DU is probably a better place without my snarkier juror comments. hunter Jun 2016 #20

been chosen 3 times already... IcyPeas Jun 2016 #21

careful Kali Jun 2016 #22

No, not at all. No star, no jury service. I am one who enjoys jury service auntAgonist Jun 2016 #25

They changed that requirement based on feedback, a star is no longer required. n/t seaglass Jun 2016 #29

Thank you! That's very good to know. n/t auntAgonist Jun 2016 #30

I don't like it. So I have decided how I will vote from here on out for all juries. GOLGO 13 Jun 2016 #26

I don't miss "over the top or otherwise inappropriate at all." Miles Archer Jun 2016 #27

Well come on OriginalGeek Jun 2016 #37

I'll get right back to you on that after I check the TOS to see if I can alert on you Miles Archer Jun 2016 #41

I got a "summons" to serve on a jury, even though Hayduke Bomgarte Jun 2016 #28

You wouold have seen the post to be judged if you agreed with the rule. Ptah Jun 2016 #31

The admins decided to scrap the "star member" rule. MH1 Jun 2016 #40

I don't like not seeing results mentalsolstice Jun 2016 #32

So you know, the "must be a star member" requirement was dropped. MH1 Jun 2016 #39

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #44

Agreed. I would like to know the results of a jury that I served on. (eom) StevieM Jun 2016 #48

massive upgrade, with jurors actually prompted to follow rules rather than geek tragedy Jun 2016 #34

I like it DemonGoddess Jun 2016 #36

No !!!!!!!!!!!!!! i want to find out the results. trueblue2007 Jun 2016 #42

I don't think curiosity is important enough BainsBane Jun 2016 #46

Somewhat of a workaround to seeing the whole thread being alerted on. mentalsolstice Jun 2016 #45

I don't understand BainsBane Jun 2016 #47

I find it's easier and more precise than the old system ailsagirl Jun 2016 #49

I like it less than the old way, but I think it's better for DU... petronius Jun 2016 #51

I'd like to know how in the fuck pintobean Jun 2016 #53

You can't, of course caraher Jun 2016 #57

I don't care for it. Orrex Jun 2016 #55

Like others have said, I don't like not being notified. Behind the Aegis Jun 2016 #62

I think I'm leaning toward the old system. IrishEyes Jun 2016 #56

I would like to log on without being asked Bluzmann57 Jun 2016 #58

Robb is a dingbat IronLionZion Jun 2016 #59

It doesn't bother me either way, however I never get yuiyoshida Jun 2016 #60

Just did another jury & I voted exactly like I said I'm going to do. GOLGO 13 Jun 2016 #61

No Sherman A1 Jun 2016 #63