So if Lieberman kills and eats a Christian baby we can't start a thread?

[Cronus Protagonist]

I know we don't have a right to free speech on a private individual's server, but to disallow threads about something negative regarding a candidate, particularly something as egregious as cannibalism, or sex with a minor, or theft, or manslaughter, or..... is too much.

Join me in voting NO on the new rules, every part of section 2, in other words.

Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets!>

[demnan]

1. Would you like some Wagner with that anti-semitism?

Just kidding. ;-)

[Cronus Protagonist]

15. You know you weren't the only one to think of that crack :)

Only there are people here who actually believe it. There are even people here who seem to think that anything short of stating one's desire to own a yamulka every time Joe's name is mentioned is anti-semitic :)

[charlie]

19. I'm not one of those

but that is some seriously rank shit. You've still got time to edit the subject line, y'know.

[Cronus Protagonist]

I know. And your point is? (eom)

[charlie]

31. If you want your example to be read

as if the fact that it's a Jew eating a Christian baby somehow compounds the heiniousness of the crime...

What the hell, it's your neck. Nevermind.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[tjdee]

2. YES you can still start that thread.

I really don't get it. The rules are quite mild.

As long as the text of your message isn't "What a baby killer!" You'd have to expound on that.

[Brian Sweat]

4. They are not upset because they cannot start a thread about

Lieberman actually killing and eating a baby, they are upset that they cannot make up a story about Lieberman killing and eating a baby and they are pretending like the rules preclude the former because they want to do the latter.

[tjdee]

5. You must be right.

I'm wondering if that's the only explanation.

[Cronus Protagonist]

8. Who are "they" - the boogymen?

Just wondering.

Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets!>

[WilliamPitt]

10. Look in the mirror

[Cronus Protagonist]

12. I really enjoy seeing "ignored" replies to my posts

It means I'm doing something right :)

[Brian Sweat]

13. Yes, they are the boogymen who insist on posting

thread after thread bashing other candidates and are upset because the new rules changes will prevent them from doing this.

[Cronus Protagonist]

39. I'm not advocating that people post candidate bashing threads

I'm advocating a NO vote on section 2 of the new rules. So the boogymen won't gain anything from my position, and the rest of us might avoid losing something.

[Brian Sweat]

53. A moose because a vest has no sleaves?

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[Cronus Protagonist]

58. Only you know what you mean

If you do, please edify me.

[Cronus Protagonist]

Actually, I stand corrected

Unless it was a *supporter* of Lieberman that ate the baby...

Rule #5:

5. Discussion threads which paint supporters of any Democratic candidate in a negative light are forbidden.

Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets!>

[mandyky]

3. Threads like this is why I am voting yes for the rules

I think all candidate posts should go over in Candidates and Campaigns anyway.

[arwalden]

7. Threads Like This Is Why My Ignore File Continues To Grow

... and grow and grow.

We don't need more rules... just more courage to click the ignore button.

-- Allen

[Cronus Protagonist]

I agree with you - the ignore button is the key to peace and quiet

I use it extensively.

[WilliamPitt]

6. Let's Go New Rules Let's Go! *clap clap* Let's Go New Rules Let's Go!

*clap clap*

Dude, you win. Hands down you win. This is by far the most absurd thread ever posted in General Discussion. Way to go.

[realFedUp]

9. I look forward to tomorrow.

I hope you aren't voting in the Recall Cronus....

[Cronus Protagonist]

11. No, but I am voting in the DU poll.

You know it's a NO from me, right?

[JNelson6563]

14. You could post it in LBN

But there are rules. For instance, you would have to post it within 12 hours of breaking, use only the actual headline as your thread title and provide link to story.

I look forward to the rules going up in GD. There are many here how suffer from a lack of comprehension regarding dialogue. They may be in for some surprise deletions. Either that or they've understood all along and falesly portrayed themselves as ignorant simpletons quite successfully. :shrug: We'll know soon enough.

Julie

[Cronus Protagonist]

17. Good point.

Presumably we could find a media whore who would publish such a story, we would know about it within 12 hours and there would be an online link.

But what if there isn't?

[JNelson6563]

43. Rots of Ruck

;-)

[Cronus Protagonist]

47. Eggsactly :)

[German-Lefty]

16. I agree, I think the rules go a bit too far there.

Ok, if someone's running around tring to recruit Republicans, ban him, but let people post about candidates positive and negative.

[Cronus Protagonist]

20. I support the first section of the new rules

It's the second section that I'm campaigning against. I think they're poorly conceived, will be difficult to enforce, will stifle creative discussion and will give heavy handed moderators too many excuses for bad moderating.

[JVS]

18. Do you want the Repukes to win? If you do you'll shut up, no matter what!

If the 9 male candidates gang-rape Carol Moseley Braun, it will be our duty to ignore it. Dwelling on such a heinous crime would only make Rove happy. /centrist electibility whore mode

[Cronus Protagonist]

22. It would be our duty to ignore a gang rape by all candidates? Huh?

I have integrity and would never keep quiet about such an event. You can make your own choices, but let me say that from my perspective your assertion on my "duty" is way, way off base.

[Brian Sweat]

25. No, it would be you duty not to claim that such a gang rape occured

when it had not.

[Cronus Protagonist]

29. I don't see anyone here claiming the right to make up shit

Perhaps you're reading between the lines when you need to focus on the actual lines more.

[Brian Sweat]

42. Hell, you already made up shit when you started this tread.

Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

[Cronus Protagonist]

49. IF I piss down your back and tell you it's raining...

What would you do?

Go read the thread title again. Note the use of the word "IF". Now, I know you might have difficulty understanding English, after all we're not all American or British or Australian, but that word makes the whole sentence perfectly acceptable and immune to your accusation that I made up shit.

Now if I had said that Lieberman HAD done this, I would have to agree with your interpretation. However, that is not the case.

[Brian Sweat]

51. I read the title, now read my post and try to concentrate.

I didn't say you made up a story about Lieberman eating babies. I said you made up a story about not being able to post the story if it were real.

In other words.

You are claiming that under the new rules you cannot post a negative thread about a candidate even if the subject of the thread is a true story.

This is incorrect. You made this shit up. You lied about what the new rules say.

[Cronus Protagonist]

57. Patronizing is best done when you're right

You claim I knew the thread title was incorrect and a deliberate lie, yet I posted a correction that you either didn't read or ignored.

And the same problem exists, the rules say that you can't post that about a *supporter* of a candidate, even if it were true.

I'll put your comment down to you not reading my correction as I'd hate to suggest you're willfully ignorant, but the preponderance of the evidence is against you.

[JVS]

48. I agree with you completely.

I was being sarcastic, hence the "/centrist electability whore mode" I was saying that only a centrist electibility whore would be insist that we hush up or ignore such an event.

[Cronus Protagonist]

50. Woops! Sorry. I missed that slash...

Didn't see it in the heat of the moment. I just re-read your post with {/whore} mode on and I understand it now.

[Skinner]

24. No offense, but...

This is the stupidest thing I have read so far.

Which rule, exactly, would forbid talking about how the 9 male candidates gang-raped Carol Moseley Braun?

[JVS]

54. I didn't mention your new horrible rules, but keeping quiet on such an...

issue would certainly be in the spirit of the new rules, although not specifically required by them.

[Skinner]

21. Do me this favor...

Find me the rule which states that you can't start a thread about an actual event involving Joe Lieberman. Or any candidate. I challenge you.

[Cronus Protagonist]

26. I presume you didn't read the thread before posting

I corrected myself earlier in the thread.

It seems I could post about the candidate but NOT about his supporters? Or am I misinterpreting that too?

[Skinner]

30. Oh, jesus. You guys are really reaching.

The rule about supporters is to stop threads like:

"Is it just me, or are all the Dean supporters assholes?" or "Kucinich supporters are all loopy."

If a supporter of one of the candidates gang-rapes Carol Mosely Braun, then OF COURSE you can talk about it.

How stupid do you people think I am? Really. These complaints are getting more and more desperate.

[Cronus Protagonist]

32. You proved my point.

Which is that the second section of rules is open to interpretation, unclear and overly far reaching and if people vote FOR them, they will be opening a huge can of worms that could possibly lead to DU being a wasteland in the near future.

Again, I urge everyone to vote NO.

[arwalden]

27. I Think Skinner Is Correct About This One...

... you COULD start a thread about this event (if it happened.)

You just couldn't EXPRESS YOUR OUTRAGE BY TYPING IN ALL CAPS AND SHOUTING AT THE TOP OF YOUR LUNGS HOW ANGRY IT MADE YOU FEEL!

;-)

-- Allen

[Cronus Protagonist]

35. Was that smiley face you made there an excessive use of punctuation?

I think your post would be deleteable, particularly if there were a few mods who don't like you generally.

[DiverDave]

23. How does

something like this post further the cause?
I come here to get ideas on how to get the word out that this country is going to hell in a handbasket.
Candidate bashing, bashing others just pulls us away from the goal.
And we know who benefits from that.

KNOCK IT OFF!!, Lets stay focused on the prize:
The return of our country to sanity.

[Cronus Protagonist]

28. It furthers the cause because...

it brings up a discussion on the new rules practical application *before* the vote is made and the rules are cast in stone, thereby allowing the activists on DU to campaign and influence the decision.

[DiverDave]

45. I wasn't refering to the rules changing.

I was talking about the infighting going on here.
If I did a bit of hijacking, I apologize.
I am just concerned about the drift away from, IMO, why we are all here for.

Dave

[Cronus Protagonist]

52. I understand.

And I think that we can focus on more than one topic at a time, and this is, IMHO, of paramount importance for the future of DU, so I thought it was a good idea to start an irreverent thread on the topic so that all points of view could be brought up without the overpowering presence of the owner of the board who is proposing these ill conceived (IMHO) rules.

[Spentastic]

33. There are excellent reasons

For opposing the new rules and you have successfully managed to touch on virtually none of them.

You're making people with genuine concerns seem shrill by association.

Well done.

[Cronus Protagonist]

36. Thanks.

I appreciate your input, although you do sound a little shrill by association.

[Spentastic]

37. My pleasure

I'm pretty sure that shrillness you hear would be an echo.

[Cronus Protagonist]

40. I didn't notice until you pointed it out.

And it is strange that it's only your post that seems shrill. Perhaps I need to see a doctor :)

[dofus]

38. Well, I'm going to vote yes

because I'm mightily tired of seeing stupid, lame, idiotic threads which exist only to bash a particular candidate and start a flame war. I don't learn anything useful from those threads, and I'm beginning to feel I'm wasting my time on DU. Maybe I'll go back to thinking DU is a good use of my time.

[Cronus Protagonist]

41. That's your prerogative

Perhaps you would contribute more if you asserted what improvements you think would come about by voting YES.

[LeahMira]

44. So if Lieberman...

You could have chosen a more appropriate and respectful comment to make your point.

Let's focus on Joe Lieberman, the person who is a Democratic candidate.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[Freddie Stubbs]

56. You certainly can -- just not in the GD forum

That would go in the Breaking News forum or the Politics and Campaigns forum, especially if the baby eating took place at a debate or campaign event.

[Cronus Protagonist]

59. True

But the readership drops by probably 99% if you post in any other forums. And this forum is the heart of DU, so it's of vital importance to most of us, myself included.

[a_random_joel]

60. My .02, or, since I'm Jewish... is it .01?

I find this post offensive. I am no Lieberman fan, but you are using an ethnic stereotype to make your point. So this post IS Anti-Semitic.

Yes, there are times when some people are oversensitive. That does not in any way justify those who are UNDERsensitive.

As for the bigger issue regarding changing the rules, as one who has been on the wrong side of the rules a few times myself, I think they are as egalitarian as can be expected. If it ain't broke...

[sangh0]

61. You convinced me!

I'm voting Yes

[ScreamingMeemie]

62. I am locking this thread.

Please post all comments to this thread:

http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=437785&mesg_id=437785

Thank You.