5th Madsen Article: Free Repub-linked troll rigging operation targets DU!

[jamboi]

Breaking news -- just coming in off my brain waves as fast as I can type, Madsen's deep undercover investigation uncovers people actually payed to crash other people's political parties!

Okay, to get serious for a minute, this is majorly sucking! Even the responsiveness of the site is getting trashed. Is there something we can do to counter these attacks? I wonder for instance if we could persuade the admins to put some kind of waiting period before people could post. Well we'll probably need a host of strategies. Lets start brainstorming here...

[mhr]

1. Link Please

eom

[Hello_Kitty]

2. Really? How much?

Can't those f**kers just get a job like regular people?

[americanwoman]

3. Published??? /eom

[jsamuel]

4. Now that I believe

The last day or two have been overloaded with them.

[sportndandy]

5. We should be flattered.

Because we certainly won't be fooled.

We have a saying at DU: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, well, we Won't Get Fooled Again!

[jamboi]

6. Yeah, fear is a powerful motivator. n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

39. Sounds like a song from Pinball Wizard.

[aquart]

7. Gosh, I wonder who.

Actually, I kind of admire the thoroughness of it. They aren't leaving anything to chance. Paying people to keep us dispirited and demoralized.

Can you imagine what kind of person takes the money?

Someone who looks at the Bill of Rights and believes it means the opposite of what it says?

[jamboi]

8. Fortunately not very bright ones. n/t

[Sideways]

10. Hey I Just Got Told That Civility Isn't My Strong Suit

I had to remind the poor dear that my strong suit is my Armani but that my Max Mara or Prada would do in a pinch. ShitFire the Fuckwittage patrol is taking a dump on our porch. Time to rub their noses in it I say.

It is really sad because they are so "worried" about our "cause." What the Fuck are we the United Way? Our cause? Shit these asshats have NO FUCKING CLUE.

[saracat]

22. And I just got told I wrote the worst sentence ever!

That is just DU. But we are overloaded with trolls. And it is creepy. I guess we just push alert.

[leftchick]

36. LOL....

you have always had an inciting 'way with words' Sideways! I LOVE it and don't ever stop. Fuckwittage has aways been my fav!

:hi:

[AnIndependentTexan]

9. About to go to bed, but just noticed when loading this page

it took longer then usual to load Democratic Underground. It is 3am here and I'm about to go to sleep. I just wanted to make this post about the slowness incase I'm not the only one experiencing it. I'm on high speed internet and I tested it by loading a different website which came up quickly.

It could just be a lot of visitors or just me having trouble with my computer. That was why I tested the other page though which loaded normally.

Self edit: Just editing this to add that it seems to be working ok right now after I posted. Don't know how to explain that slow down but was most likely on my end

[tritsofme]

16. I've noticed this site has been slower than usual

as well tonight, and I have high speed internet as well.

[jamboi]

17. Its not an illusion. Its DU on overload. n/t

[saracat]

24. I had that happen a couple of times tonight. It took forever to go from

page to page. And it was hard to post! You just clicked and the page sat there!

[ebayfool]

25. Another site threatened an attempted DOS attack - I believe Skinner...

has been alerted to it though.

http://www.itshappening.com/showthread.php?t=76113&page=3&pp=15
http://www.itshappening.com/showthread.php?t=76113&page=4&pp=15

[Nordic]

97. this page acted VERY STRANGE to me last night as well

(the same time that you're posting).

I run a MAC, and the page loaded, then quickly re-loaded and re-loaded over and over until I clicked out of it. It's like it kept downloading something onto my hard drive.

Kind of freaked me out, so I got out of it.

Today it seems fine.

I've never seen a page on DU, or any other page, for that matter, act that way.

[propagandafreegal]

11. How do they organize all these people and we don't have more folks talking

They seem to be miracle workers...

[MarkusQ]

53. Not sure if it's what's going on here...

But another board I was on a year or so back (dealing with open source software issues) was hit by a huge troll storm. Someone dug through the server logs and found that a large percentage of them were coming from a "PR firm" in LA. They blocked (IIRC) 16 IP addresses and it helped for a while.

I doubt that would be sufficient as a cure here, but the "PR firm" might well be the explanation. They aren't working miracles, they are hiring grunts.

--MarkusQ

[rainbow4321]

12. There was one blog that had a 24 hr waiting period...

from when they initially signed up til when they could post..it cut down on the fools/trolls since there was a cooling off period. Is it Kos that does that? Can't remember and don't know what all it involves from an administrator standpoint.
If things start to hit the fan like people are saying it will this week, it may get worse before it gets better. As hard as it is, maybe not kicking their threads would help..as tempting as it is to taunt them, it will also keep their stupid threads kicked and in the way of the more important ones. Let them drop below with their arms/keyboards flailing down to the bottom of all the threads, we can wave to them on their way down...give them one of shrub's one finger salutes.


Just remember the phrase: "DON'T FEED THE TROLLS"

[jamboi]

23. Good idea, though I think it'd need to be longer than 24 hours. n/t

[bunny planet]

101. dailykos has a 24 hour waiting period.

[SomthingsGotaGive]

13. I don't want to sound rude....

But who are you?

How do you have 1000+ posts in 12 days?

That’s over 90 posts a day.

Do you have time to read DU.?

Have I missed something?

If so I apologize.

I'm not suggesting anything.

[jamboi]

27. Look around and read my posts and you'll have a great idea of who i am.

You can't do 1000+ posts in 12 days and not have revealed something about your character, who you are, what you believe in, etc. And yes, you have missed a lot. But I won't hold it against you. :-)

[eomer]

37. Thanks jamboi

for all you've done in the last 12 days.

I noticed fewer posts yesterday - did you finally decide to get some sleep?

Thanks again.

e

[jamboi]

68. No I went to the rally in SF where we talked to minority leader Pelosi's

staff. So most of the day I was away. Sleep is fleeting these days, but thanks for your concern and yes I'll keep an eye on that.

[propagandafreegal]

14. I'm new and I've said in another thread I wish there was some type of

vetting process for new members. I'm no RNC operative, but how do I prove it???

[jamboi]

19. I think you're right. We may need some kind of qualifying process. Awful,

but may be forced on us.

[aquart]

29. I say, Greet them with crullers. Hot coffee. Soup.

They only attack when news is breaking or about to break. Think of them as robins, harbingers of spring.

They infallibly tell us when we are getting warm, warmer, HOT.

It's time to start a WE LOVE YOU, TROLLS campaign.

You only have rats when the ship is afloat, after all.

[jamboi]

70. Well, that's a good point that I hadn't considered. Thnx for cheering me !

:-)

[americanwhothinks]

40. "You're With Us or You're Against Us" Fear of Those Who Disagree,

for DU?

I am new here, also, and certainly I'd hope that everything I say would be viewed with caution, skepticism, critical thinking....

Those who see it differently, those who, yes, may represent worldviews DU'ers generally rejects---

can lead to censorship. Policy that resembles the so-called "Patriot" Act. Insecurity that leads to closed doors, fewer members, a bunch of people whose heads all nod in same direction!!

If we were all smart about what we heard, who we "believed"(should belief even factor in?? how is belief relevant, I wonder!) and what threads we found credible/incredible,

these "trolls" (and yes, I could be one of them-- and so could you!) would have no power.

OUr power should be in what we say, and all of us are free to ignore/avoid the naysayer, freeper, whatever....

But to seriously consider a kind of censorhip--- limiting membership to some elite few,or creating policies that will "ferret out the freeper factor"-- seems to me to be an admission of a kind of weakness, an inability to discern, to remain clear-sighted and clear-minded, to decide who/what we wish to follow up and respond to and who/what we consider "N/A."

George Bush is afraid of those who disagree with him-- people were taking oaths of allegiance at his rallies-- does DU wish to subscribe to the same kind of fear, insecurity, impulse to ban and abolish those who represent another point of view-- even another agenda altogether?

[americanwhothinks]

41. My post got all mangled! Sorry I didn't reread before posting it.-- I gue

it still makes sense, but the order is all wrong. The end was tacked onto the middle-- so it's hard to follow.

But the basic principles are all there: censorship and fear express weakness. intelligence is bigger than fear....

we don't need to fear other points of view. fear of others leads to backward policy...and DU could end up looking like the administration DU rightfully rejects!!

[jamboi]

75. Yes its a fine line we walk. Still a vetting process or tools to cut down

trolling could be a good idea.

[SmokingJacket]

45. No way.... I love it that members of that OTHER site come here.

I mean, think about it. They get us to defend our positions more vigorously. They might start flame wars, but we always win, because they either get tombstoned or go away. We're right, anyway. ;)

Plus... I bet more than a few of them are persuaded by us. Really. The arguments I read here are compelling. The people are NICE. It's just a way more enjoyable place to be than... over there.

I'd bet money we convert the occasional freeper. It's worth putting up with their trash to have the chance to do that. Why only let in the believers?

[americanwhothinks]

50. propagandists don't like freedom.... and this "vetting" proposal...

well, it seems a bit scared of freedom (and the "disruptions" that no doubt occur when people are free!), as well!

[americanwoman]

15. I got no cred, but here's a thought...

The thing is, if they're posting in plain sight, at least you know what they're saying. I like the post-before-you-can-start-a-thread thing. And the mods seem pretty good at deleting riff & raff.

There's not much to be done about keeping out the disrupters if they really want in, especially if they're on the net via machines that don't have a permanent IP address.

[jamboi]

18. Actually there's lots that can be done to keep disruptors down. And it

looks like we're just going to have to learn how to fight it.

[americanwoman]

26. Sure ..

but not without loosing something in the process. You can charge $$, create private forums, etc...

And you can certainly fight the disruption-of-service type attacks by requiring time between posts.

Now if we could just get our hands on the bullsh*t-detector software. B-)

[proudbluestater]

20. There is a software available

I was on a forum, it might have been commongroundcommonsense and your first five posts were monitored by the mods before you were allowed to post on your own.

I finally had to leave there for the reason you're talking about here, Freeper attacks. But with 60,000 plus members here, I feel there's safety in THOSE numbers under normal circumstances.

[jamboi]

21. What's the software? n/t

[shraby]

28. Just hitting the alert button will help...

I've done it a couple of times lately.

[jamboi]

30. Yes, especially if they are dumb enough to be obvious. I've used that too

but tonight's are not that obvious to where its just a matter of hitting the alert button.

[jamboi]

35. First five posts monitored. Not a bad idea. Maybe even more needed.nt

[SmokingJacket]

46. Wouldn't work.

Who can't come up with five fake posts?

Why waste mods time?

[jamboi]

74. Some variation might work. keep brainstorming. n/t

[coreystone]

31. Facetiously, everyone should check "profiles", it amazes me...

to find how high people can get their post count up. What d'a think over 1 month as an active lurker, then we can start a curve which limits every to no more than 85 posts per day.

1000 posts means very little any more!

:-)

[jamboi]

34. A post per day limit -- hmmmm... I think you're onto something there!

Especially when new. One of the problems with the structure of this forum is the whole migrating thread thing doesn't handle a heavy load well. It creates a horserace, and artificially inflates posting counts by "kicks". If it were more like you rate the topic and if collectively the group feels its important and that brings it to the top, then okay. But just because I post something new my topic is at the top of the stack? That's just stupid in such a heavy use situation.

[notadmblnd]

51. I think if there was a way to see a posters

history that it would cut out a lot of the trolling. There was one place that I used to visit, where if you clicked on the persons profile, there was a link to their last 100 posts. The moderators would not have to make a big change and it would avoid alienating people that really only have the best intentions.

[MarkusQ]

54. I like this idea

Being able to see their posts might help a lot--if nothing else, it would allow you to tell if someone was just disagreeing with you on a certain point, or was selling flim-flam across the board.

--MarkusQ

[skids]

67. slashdot has this.

Slashdot also has a rating/moderation system.

[glitch]

82. That's a nice feature, not just for spotting trolls, but also for reading

posts of users you find interesting. We've got some excellent posters here, thoughtful and well-spoken. Some that I haven't seen for a long time.
It would be nice to check in on them sometimes.

[smartvoter]

73. This might also keep us from running off good ones.

I was called a freeper several times when I started posting here. My guess is that if a trail existed, I wouldn't have been called one at all because the accusers could see that I have been actively supporting the cause.

I just read a threat wherein a new person said it's getting old to be called freeper every time he/she makes an unpopular observation. My guess is there are plenty of people who get sick of it and are run off. I'm thick skinned and don't care enough about what other people think to have been run off, but I'd imagine there are a number of people who would be seriously offended.

In short (too late -- ha ha), the history would be useful not only to easily spot someone who comes to make trouble, but also to help us identify the "good ones."

[americanwhothinks]

43. George Bush is afraid of those who see things differently, does DU

want to invent policy that resembles the Bush Admin's approach to difference of opinion? Do we want to have a "You're Either For Us or Against Us" worldview?

I am new here, also, and certainly I'd hope that everything I say would be viewed with caution, skepticism, critical thinking....as I would hope ANY post would be viewed.

Fear of those who see it differently, those who, yes, may represent worldviews DU'ers generally reject---can lead to censorship and policy that resembles the so-called "Patriot" Act. Insecurity that leads to closed doors, fewer members, a bunch of people whose heads all nod in same direction should be,

in my opinion,

countered with intelligence, discernment, sharp yet open-minded consideration. What are the merits of a given argument? If an argument or expression has no value-- ignore it!!

If we were all smart about what we heard, who we "believed"(should
belief even factor in?? how is belief relevant, I wonder!) and what
threads we found credible/incredible,these "trolls" (and yes, I could be one of them-- and so could you!) would have no power.

OUr power should be in what we say, and all of us are free to ignore/avoid the naysayer, freeper, whatever....

But to seriously consider a kind of censorhip--- limiting membership to some elite few,or creating policies that will "ferret out the freeper factor"-- seems to me to be an admission of a kind of weakness, an inability to discern, to remain clear-sighted and clear-minded, to decide who/what we wish to follow up and respond to and who/what we consider "N/A."

George Bush is afraid of those who disagree with him-- people were taking oaths of allegiance at his rallies-- does DU wish to subscribe to the same kind of fear, insecurity, impulse to ban and abolish those who represent another point of view-- even another agenda altogether?

[Celebration]

47. Hmmm

Nobody here wants the internet controlled. Nobody here wants freedom of expression curtailed. On the other hand, this place is supposed to be like a sort of family, not an example of freedom of expression. If you like that, go to the newsgroups. Then see what you find in the political newsgroups. You can go to alt.politics if you want a free for all. I also think the "freepers" can have their own moderated boards. There is all the freedom you need for this purpose-- the freedom to leave if you don't like the rules. This is also private property. It is owned by a couple of people. They probably don't want to pay for this site and have it filled up with a lot of Republican propaganda.

[americanwhothinks]

48. I don't think that everyone who disagrees should be viewed as "non-family"

and as my post suggests, I think there are serious limitations in a "family" that doesn't allow for differences of opinion.

I agree with you, however, that the questions this site poses are different than general questions regarding freedom of expression,

but my concern-- that a "family," can turn into a very one-sided, lop-sided, "we think" "group think" (non-think!)-- remains!

[americanwhothinks]

52. "the freedom to leave if you dont' like the rules"-- I accept the rules,

and I am responding to accusations hurled at that those who question, resist, are skeptical, raise valid questions...

I am responding to those who see everyone who is honestly discouraged and hopeless as "freepers."

Many honest democrats feel hopeless-- and all I'm saying is that I think these people should be accepted in the family, even if their view is depressing and discouraging...

if there isn't room for this HERE, well, gosh, that's too bad.

[jamboi]

76. Well said. Hear, hear! n/t

[Pepper32]

44. You're right.

I use to think all 1,000+ posters here at DU were oldbies, now I see some of these 1,000+ posters have not been here much longer than me. They just post their every thought...lol I don't know how they find the time, it really is amazing. Seems to me the whole post count purpose is pointless now.

[dlaliberte]

49. slashdot's karma idea

I agree that the number of posts is not a good measure of anything but persistence. However, we should look at how the rating system at slashdot.org works, and maybe use a similar system here. If you read some of the slashdot forums with the default filter settings you will quickly notice that all of the quality postings, as rated by other authors of high quality postings, take precedence, and this makes for a more readable thread.

What I don't like about slashdot is the due to the same filtering. None of my messages have gotten very high ratings because they start out low be default, and are thus invisible to most readers/authors. This is especially true because I tend to respond in threads that are a couple days old, and thus already old news. Thus my karma remains low.

Slashdot also has some good technology for scaling to massive numbers of readers. That may not be due to their forum system as much as the underlying hardware and network support.

[jamboi]

77. What if things went to a new posting area to be given a chance, & then

got rated and fell into the rated system. A combo of both ideas.

[aquart]

32. Still don't see a link.

[coreystone]

33. There will be no link! These are "time waster" posts! :-) n/t

[jamboi]

38. Oh yeah. forgot!

[momzno1]

42. anyone else here have very long ignore lists?

I add at least 2 people a day. I don't mind thoughtful questions that are skeptical as long as they are backed up. Plus, I don't have enough energy to question my TRUTH : which is John Kerry won the election - and Chimpy stole it. Plain and simple.
Before this election friends asked me who I think would win, and I said "Kerry will win, but if the results don't show it, then it was stolen"
No doubts in my mind, and I don't need to hear the naysayers crap about us not having any evidence. You just have to look around you to see what a liar the chimp is- and how everything he touches goes to sh*t. Complete and utter corruption. No Doubts in my mind - and I don't want to be brought down by anyone else's negativity.
I am visualizing every day Kerry on the podium at the inauguration and Bush in jail.
I suggest everyone make this part of their daily routine - we can create this reality!

[MarkusQ]

57. The problem with ignore lists

The problem with ignore lists is that newcommers start out seeing all the garbage. That seriously undermines the credibility of the whole site (and, by implication, the rest of us).

--MarkusQ

[CatWoman]

55. you know, I'm having a hard time figuring out what the fuck

you're talking about.

5th Madsen Article: Free Repub-linked troll rigging operation targets DU!

what the hell is going on here?

Is there a link to back this up?

or can you provide a link to the article?

[harris8]

56. I thought it was obvious Jamboi was mainly venting...

Re-read his post: "... just coming in off my brain waves as fast as I can type..." and: "Okay, to get serious for a minute,..."

Seems quite clear to me, as there is no 5th Madsen article yet, at least not on http://www.onlinejournal.com/index.html

[KoKo]

58. It's a false subject line. Stuff like that used to get deleted here on DU

There's no 5th Wayne Madsen article, but Jamboi sucked folks into read this...:eyes:

[SharonRB]

59. Not fair

I just scrolled through this whole thread trying to find the link. Thanks for the clarification.

[IAMREALITY]

60. It never ceases to amaze me

How easy it is for some DU'rs to not understand the context of a thread.

I don't think it was possible for Jamboi to make it any more clear that he was using satire fueled by a personal message he wanted to express.

Jamboi, You Rock. It's all good.

[Razorback_Democrat]

62. Kick it!

Jamboi was obvious

[SharonRB]

63. Maybe I just don't know him well enough yet ...

...to know he was being sarcastic. Obviously I wasn't the only one. There were a few other people asking for the link.

[KoKo]

66. Jamboi is known for Madsen Posts...to subject line that this is a 5th Post

was misleading. I don't have a problem with Jamboi or his posts personally. But, no link and a "misleading" subject line weren't the best way to alert folks to "satire." If it was satire, I didn't get it and neither did some others. :shrug:

[IAMREALITY]

69. Not My Problem. N/T

[jamboi]

89. Apologies Koko01. You know I would never want to bum you out.You rock!

[CatWoman]

79. and it never ceases to amaze me

how people can retort with the stupidest shit imaginable.

I don't come into this forum often, and had no idea what was going on.

[jamboi]

80. Sorry. If I'd had the energy maybe I should have written an op ed and

linked it. My apologies if I confused folks

[CatWoman]

83. It's all good

I was confused, and my lack of patience got the better of me.

However, those who responded negatively to my inquiry can all go get fucked.

[IAMREALITY]

90. Exactly

"I was confused, and my lack of patience got the better of me."

To rephrase my post, it amazes me how quickly people rush to judgement reading a thread before taking the time to put it in context.

Your lack of patience caused you to take the thread out of context and get confused. Seems like my post was dead on then.

[SharonRB]

99. Thanks for the acknowledgement n/t

[jamboi]

72. Correct, Madsen hasn't actually posted a new article yet. n/t

[jamboi]

71. It was a self-parody satire on the freep activity we've been experiencing

And also the essence of the headline seems to be accurate.

[righteous1]

61. Just be aware that censorship and demands for rigid conformity

to the mandates of a self important would be dictator are more in keeping with a Fascist state than that of a free & open forum such as this IMHO

[Cocoa]

64. who's "we"?

the ones attacking the site are the spammers trying to cash in on people's disappointment over the election.

Btw, there's a special spot in hell for these people.

[Psyop Samurai]

65. Perhaps all posts could be screened by jamboi...

If jamboi were to screen all posts, then only the right information would get through, and our efforts would not be sabotaged. I imagine he's up to the task, judging from his prodigious output.

I've spent day and night in this forum since the election, an election that was fraudulent long before it was stolen. I am here to learn, not become known. I've wasted more time on posts like this than I have on naysayers.

Why are you framing this in terms of "crashing other people's political parties", when you are not a Democrat yourself? I appreciate your enthusiasm, but perhaps it's time to take it down a notch. Perhaps some introspection is in order.

[jamboi]

81. Yeah, there we go. I like that idea (satire). :-)

[jamboi]

86. Psyop Samurai, like your handle. Yes I was trying to counter disinfo

campaign that we at DU have been taking a huge hit for yesterday. The board clearly says that progressives of any stripe are welcome so being an outspoken Green is perfectly acceptable here. Up until last night I had been almost entirely straight laced for my first 1000 postings. Guess something snapped when we were getting these obvious discouragement attempts. Humor to cure the sick. I'd say it was a good thing, but others can disagree...

[Psyop Samurai]

94. I appreciate humor, and strong opinions, including yours.

Where I take exception is when someone manufactures a crisis over content control, where a) none exists, and b) thoughtful skeptics are painted with a broad brush by those leading the charge in a particular direction. Given your concern for disinfo, I'm sure you're aware of false flags, and how certain actions, however inadvertent, might be construed as one.

ps. Forgive my little dig about party affiliation... I was just fuckin' with ya to make a point about pointing fingers. :) I'm a lifelong Democrat, but I'll join hands with anyone, including conscientious Republicans, to take this country back.

[jamboi]

95. I totally agree "I'll join hands w/ anyone, inc. conscientious Republican,

to take this country back. Pragmatic. I like it!

[skids]

78. Here's how other boards deal with it.

They allow users to rate other users posts, and those ratings also reflect on the user themselves. As a user's rating gets better, his posts start out with a higher initial rating. On some of these forums, you can filter posts with really bad ratings.

Now, in a forum like DU, one way I have seen ratings done is really quite nice. You simply have special smileys that constitute a good rating (or a bad one.) They are called "cookies" or "tips" or whatever and you just include them in your reply.

My personal take is that you should have good smileys and bad smileys, and you should count both on the post. That way you cannot get rid of a bad smiley by having your fellow trolls rate you up, and you cannot trash someone else's good smileys by rating them down -- both ratings accumulate.

For the user, I'd like to see good smileys be permanant, but bad smileys get reduced every 30 days, depending on how many good smileys you have.

If I had my druthers, I'd give the DUers a nice carrot when they posted something good. At least I think donkeys like carrots. For bad donkeys, I say hit them with a wet haddock.

[KoKo]

88. It pits folks against each other though. I think someone asked Skinner

about that one time down in the AA Forum. You could ask him about it again. The mods here tend to get most of the Troll stuff, or other DU'ers eventually out the posters who have agendas. It's kind of like "peer review." Some aren't found out if they are very clever...but folks just put them on "ignore." It all works in a way without having "smilies" and stuff for rating.. :shrug:

[Vote4Kerry]

92. I like the format on DU

A lot of people have been posting valuable information for the investigation into fraud (i.e. links, data, etc.). I think that if we start censoring people, we might also censor out potentially critical information that can be used in an investigation. I think that the people should just keep an open mind when reading posts and if too much name calling, etc. happens, just tell the mods!

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

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

[jamboi]

87. Whew, that one disappeared so quickly I didn't even get to see it. Bummer.

[IAMREALITY]

91. LOL Jamboi n/t

[Kralizec]

85. Bastards!! We'll make more websites to get the TRUE information out than

they could ever try to shit down. THE BASTARDS WILL FAIL!

[Justathought]

93. I am a moderator on another site ...

and if we are concerned with members coming in to disrupt the site ... we the moderators are on watch. If it is determined a new member may be cause for concern, we use our site rules to warn such members that certain types of posts are unacceptable. If it continues, more action is take to the final point of banning the member. I am of the belief this site has qualified moderators to do the very same processes. You are going to get freepers but you can't oust them for just being a freeper. I have been new here and am concerned that all newbies would be punished for a few who are or would break DU's rules for posting. Why not let the moderators do what they do best ... moderate.:argh:

[mountainvue]

96. Well, you were here last night.

It was unbearable. Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea for posters to have a higher post count before they can begin new threads.

[Freddie Stubbs]

98. Do you have a link for that?

Thanks.

[indigo11153]

100. Where is the link?

Still looking.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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