Thread needs answer

[Mass]

Moderators,

this thread is not about going after a thread, but to find a Kerry supporter who can answer, given that most of us are blocked from answering to posts from this poster.

So, if there is somebody who is not blocked from answering, can they answer this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3177462#3177467

[wisteria]

1. AT, I am blocked big time. I bet we all are blocked from replying. n/t

[wisteria]

2. There is no way to reply to either one of them. Seems we are being set up.

The only thing to do is start our own thread. But, lets see if this original one gets traction. I do not think the moderators intention was to have people do negative posts on candidates and then block the candidates supporters from replying. I am bring this to the attention of the moderators.

[Mass]

3. You cannot answer to the thread if she blocked you from answering to her threads.

I already alerted several times because she has been attacking Kerry supporters in block in another thread and there is no way to answer (though she looked pathetic). I am going back to my silence to her. She is not worth the energy.

[wisteria]

4. I can't reply to the original poster either. I think it is a set up.

I don't even know the original posters and have never said anything about Kucinich. I think this is a set up, and if they can do it to us, they can post negatives on any candidate and that candidates supporters can not defend them. This is not freedom of speech.

[Mass]

5. helderheid did not block me (I can still send PMs_

but AK has forbidden us from answering her threads at all. This is why you cannot answer helderheid.

[wisteria]

6. Oh, so this is AK thread. I thought it was the other way around.

In a way I feel better than. I never did a thing to handheld to have been put on the no reply list.

[ray of light]

7. I'm watching but I won't kick it up to respond.

I don't think I like this block function. It means you can smear without allowing response. Though, I think you can defend in a whole new thread. But I'm not sure if it can be in the same forum or if it has to be in a different forum. This new rule is confusing.

[beachmom]

8. Disagree. I have already set up several people including the

poster in question on block reply. Perhaps this poster saw me do this, and responded accordingly. Thing is, how many "Greatest" posts do some of these troublesome members get? Not many. That is because they are only there to instigate, not to have a real debate about issues. And without us, how many responses are they going to get? The reason why there have been 200+ flame posts is because many Kerry supporters choose to engage.

The few people I've put on block reply exhibit "troll like" behavior, and are not on DU to add to the conversation. Without us to feed them, I'm not sure how much traction they're going to get.

I think Skinner did an excellent thing here by allowing people to eliminate posters from their life who are impossible to have a civil conversation with. I no longer have a problem with these people, because I can't read their posts, and they can't reply to mine.

Do not, I repeat, do not, create a new thread to respond. That is abusing the block ignore function. There are plenty of people you can discuss the 2004 election with who are sincerely upset by what happened but are willing to read a response. This poster is not one of them.

[StoryTeller]

9. I think this is wise, Beachmom.

You're right.

I'm blocked too (woo-hoo! I'm in the club!), but I haven't blocked this person because I don't really feel a need to at this point.

But I do think that starting a new thread would be a mistake at this point. Just like with our kids, there are times when you get a lot further by simply ignoring the behavior.

Don't let one person spin your universe for you. :)

[karynnj]

11. Me too - because AK doesn't like me

and the posts I had on the threads of others were actually deleted likelbecause I mentioned being blocked as I was not out of line.

[fedupinBushcountry]

12. I agree on the block issue

but this article is from 11/05 asnd has been rehashed over and over, it was purely put up to trash Kerry. We all know that JK is signed on with paper trails etc. and I think that all that info and what he has done needs to be put in that thread. Just put in with no response just info.

As far as I can tell I am not blocked and anyone who would like to PM me and give me the list of things he has done ( I cannot remember where they are) can do that. Thoughts?

Edit: It has sunkand is on the second page of GD, but if it should reappear I still think the info needs to be in there for those who lurk. I will not kick it up for any other reason.

[wisteria]

16. I agree, negative posts should not be left alone without some rebuttal. n/t

[ginnyinWI]

10. it must have sunk way down--can't find it anymore

so not to worry--let it lie. only four responses.

[karynnj]

13. That's true - so as Beachmom explained it actually worked

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[emulatorloo]

15. Block is being used to spread disinformation w/o rebuttal

I hope that the mods figure this out soon

[wisteria]

17. That is why I alerted them. This can be done to any candidate and their supporters. n/t

[fedupinBushcountry]

18. New rule on block issue

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3177820

[Blaukraut]

19. good

that out to shine the light one quite a few people who abuse the feature to stifle discussion.
My list is short - nobody on it yet. That may change in the future, but I intend to use the feature wisely and sparingly.

[beachmom]

21. I have 4 on my list. Guess I won't be starting many threads,

because I can't seem to muster the strength to remove them from block ignore. They have not a damned thing to say. Ever.

I'm not sure if I like this new rule. True, it outs this person as blocking out ALL dissent, but OTOH, there ARE a lot of haters on this site who deserve to be blocked.

[WildEyedLiberal]

20. I GUARANTEE you

The SECOND the admins unveiled the block feature, AtomicKitten came here and put every SINGLE one of us - regardless of whether she has ever actually spoken with you or not - on block. I guarantee she has literally turned DU upside down and blocked anyone who has ever had a history of posting positive things about John Kerry, ever. She personally attacked Kerry 2008, who is a very even-keeled infrequent poster with something like 200 posts to his name. I don't even think the poor guy has a star, so he doesn't post in here. But she personally reamed him because he politely asked her why she blocked him.

I guess if this post is a "personal attack" it'll get deleted but quite frankly this is extremely mild compared to the vicious slurs being hurled in GD.

FTR, I have yet to block anyone and won't do so unless I personally receive abusive replies to my posts. I have made one post in GD - one - since the block feature was unveiled but I guarantee AK blocked me within five minutes. I just feel sorry for someone that obviously CONSUMED with hatred.

[wisteria]

22. I have one person blocked- guess who? n/t

[rockymountaindem]

23. She hasn't blocked me

Although I think its is going to be interesting seeing as how most of you can't reply to her anymore. I agree it will be interesting when she can no longer do this anonymously. One thing's for sure, that poster is best described by a certain word we aren't allowed to use around DU.

[Noisy Democrat]

24. I did it

I posted a very snarky reply. If anyone here was hoping for more erudition, sorry, I have a bad cold and little patience for dealing with fools, so I just said what came into my stuffed-up head and hit Post. I expect to join the ranks of the blocked forthwith.

[unhappycamper]

25. Locking.

If you have problems with the new features, I suggest you contact the Big Guys.

[e-mail]