If you want to say something rude -- DON'T!

[Skinner]

Members are already racking up warnings, because apparently they missed the fact that the rules have changed.

The standard to judge incivility in the GD:2004 forum is no longer the "personal attack". Please read the rules. We now forbid *any* comment about another individual. We now forbid *any* comment that is uncivil, whether its about a person or a candidate.

1. The moderators have the authority to remove any post of any kind, which they consider to be contrary to our goal of civil discourse.

2. Criticism of Democratic primary candidates, their policy positions, and their campaigns is permitted. However, extreme and inflammatory attacks against Democratic primary candidates are not permitted. The moderators have the sole authority to decide whether an attack is extreme and inflammatory. Inappropriate attacks include, but are not limited to, the following: Attacks involving swear words, long strings of negative words, comparisons to Hitler or Bush, unflattering graphics, etc.

3. Posts about the "messenger" rather than "message" are categorically forbidden in the GD: 2004 Primary forum. You may not make any statement whatsoever about another member of this message board, unless it is unambiguously positive. You may not post anything that is insulting or rude to any other member, even if it is extremely mild.

4. Broad-brush statements about all or some of the supporters or opponents of any Democratic Primary candidate are forbidden. Don't paint people as disruptors or cult members.

Fascist? Yes it is.

[arwalden]

1. Kick!

How could anyone miss seeing them?

-- Allen

[Malikshah]

2. I've got to add...

I just *love* your queer duck signature!

I want the plush toy!

[Clark Can WIN]

33. Only if it talks

I've got a dear friend I'd love to give it to. He'd just die.:D

[felonious thunk]

3. Do people not realize...

that they can simply go to the Politics forum and say virtually whatever they want?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. Shoot!

You mean we actually have to restrict our posts to the merits of the candidates?

We may actually have to base our decisions and opinions on what THEY do or say?

:D

[jmaier]

5. Yep.

We're soon going to run out of things to argue about. LOL

[Hep]

6. You don't have to restrict your posts

You just have to make it LOOK LIKE you are restricting your posts.

[ClintonTyree]

7. Thanks Principal Skinner!

I've violated the rules a few times myself but I wholeheartedly agree. :toast: I remember DU when everyone got along, I hope it returns to that soon. You'll have my unquestioning support!

[Don Claybrook]

8. I'll bet you can't wait for the primaries to be over

I have a mental image of you saying you'd take Lyndon LaRouche as a candidate if all of the hostilities would just cease. :)

This, too, shall pass.

Thanks.

[Padraig18]

9. Already?????

Lord love a duck! *sigh*

[Terwilliger]

10. This should be fun

for me it's a minefield when there's already poop on my shoes

[tnlefty]

11. I suppose I'll just have to be content with calling myself a sh*$head then

Sorry, just couldn't resist being a smartass.

[Maddy McCall]

12. Kick

[Feanorcurufinwe]

13. My new rules for posting

For one thing, I noticed I was having flame wars with the same 6 people over and over. So I finally overcame my resistance and just put them on ignore. OK, so I won't have the opportunity to answer their BS, and I won't be able to 'Alert' them -- but so what? At least I won't be spending my time in pointless non-productive flame fests.

When a post get me excited, angry, eager to rebut - I stop, have a cup of decaf, do a few pushups, take the dogs for a walk. Then I reread the post. Half the time, when I've calmed down, the post that made me so excited in the first place reveals itself as so poorly thought out and written that I realize no rebuttal is necessary. Or it's been deleted or the thread locked. The other half, I have calmed down enough to respond in a reasonable manner.

When someone flames me in what I think is violation of the rules -- I do not respond. I hit 'Alert'. I wait at least 3 hours. If not deleted, I hit alert again. Wait at least 1 hour. Only then, if I am absolutely sure I can respond without flaming, do I respond.


Well, we'll see if I can live up to my noble goals.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[Rowdyboy]

14. There's a reason to actually "read" the rules

when you click on the little button to say you read the rules. Its like reading the fine print, folks, it really helps if you pay attention.

And yes, the rules have changed. God bless our moderators and give them the strength they need to keep from going postal at the bullshit they receive!

[PVnRT]

15. What? Civility? Noooooooooo

The horror.....the horror....

[Padraig18]

16. Kick

:dem:

[salin]

17. Wow.

Sometimes - one has to do what one has to do... best of luck to all in the ability to bite one's tongue (or fingertips be that the case) and think before posting even when emotions and passions are running high.

Good luck folks... its hot out there.

[Padraig18]

18. Kick

[returnable]

19. Kick

One of my posts was deleted cuz I failed to follow this rule to the letter of the law.

I don't think my post was derogatory, but I understand and support the point the moderators are trying to make :toast:

[no name no slogan]

20. Damn straight

A little fascism goes a long way in this world.

"Skinner, Skinner, Über Alles...."

:D :D :D :D

[Bonobo]

21. I'm sorry but I think that's plain rude...or you need to put your

sarcasm sign on...

[Rowdyboy]

22. Please see Message Board Rule #14 entitled "Your Freedom to Leave"

It outlines your options.

[Skinner]

24. To be fair

I think that that was meant as a joke. I did refer to the rules myself as "fascist".

[Rowdyboy]

29. Sorry

Hard to pick out the jokes sometimes...

[Bonobo]

30. Yep, me sorry too!

[no name no slogan]

36. Sorry, my bad

I shoulda put the <sarcasm&rt; tag on.

I was indeed referring to Skinner referring to himself as a fascist. I apologize if I didn't make that clear.

[JohnLocke]

23. kick

[Hawkeye-X]

25. I only have to say is this.

:P

[Padraig18]

26. Pointed kick!

:dem:

[maddezmom]

27. kick

:kick:

[Duder]

28. New rules, old rules, new new rules...

...who can keep track anymore?

;)

[chocolateeater]

31. Kick

And thank you for rescinding the 250 post rule.O8)

[Clark Can WIN]

32. Kick

But would we miss them?

[jfiling]

34. Um

"comparisons to Hitler or Bush..."

Interesting. Sadly, it seems obvious that the moderators are willing to allow comparisons of Hitler and Bush ( as was done in the sentence quoted, no matter how inadvertently ), which does nothing to raise the level of discourse in the effort to replace Bush with a better president.

[Skinner]

37. It was done in what sentence?

Did you hit alert?

[Maddy McCall]

35. kick

[kodi]

38. yes! let us reflect the real world, one where we all are polite & agree

soon, i expect DU to have as a sponsor, mr loopner the old SNL character, sadly born without a spine.

[trogdor]

39. Damn shame it had to come to this.

Go get 'em. Enough is enough.

[Skinner]

40. Yes, it is.

Damn shame.

It's also a damn shame that some people still don't seem to get it.

[Maddy McCall]

41. kick