Greetins to all, and Thank You

[Cherchez la Femme]

to that special person who donated their own money to put a star, with all its privileges, next to my name.

I'm new to DU, and posted a question to Feminists in the Lounge because I had no star nor, because of dire financial straits due to being laid-off etc., could not afford to even think of donating here.

An aside: That thread ended up a nightmare as, even though it used Ms. Clinton & Mr. Obama as examples of the point I was trying to make, it was moved to GD P when the question was not based on the Primaries at all! It, of course, turned into a pissing match between the Obama and Hillary factons.
(Question: If there are Obamaniacs, is there a term for those who are for Hillary?) Ugh. /aside


Anyways...
I'd really like to thank the very generous person who so graciously donated their hard-earned money to DU for my benefit. I believe the donor originated from this forum because I saw the thread here that I could use a star and hey presto, there it was! It appeared there was a protest about it also, but redacted, so I'm hoping it was due to the person being an Obama fan and misconstruing my post; otherwise I'm lost as to why. (I believe we all have to chill on our strong feelings of Democratic candidates --just state the facts on who we back and cut the crap trashing of the opponent-- because the time will soon come where we haveto unite behind one. This infighting is not conducive to unity, something we must have!)

I am, as usual, very proud of my good-hearted, empathic sisters :)
Thank you, very much, again.


Now... I'd like to ask a couple questions about things I don't understand here, in terms of meanings of some certain postings and philosophy:

First, what does a single period in the subject line with no added text (usually) mean? This is when it's posted in response to someone elses post, usually the OP? I don't know if it would look the same, but it may look something like this:
1. .

My second question concerns the misusage of the word Democrat when it is used where Democratic would be the proper term.
I think I understand a to a certain, limited, extent why it is seen as insulting, but I do not think I comprehend the entire reasoning why it is an insult to Democrats. I'm sorry to be so clueless, I feel I should know; but the sad thing is I just do not :blush:


Thanks yet again to my benefactor, and very nice to meet you, each and every one! I'm hoping for vibrant discussions and to learn much from you all!
:hi:

[iverglas]

1. wondered when we'd see you ;)

I've asked that same question about "Democrat", me being a furriner and all.

The answers I got were pretty much that they just do it because they can, to be annoying. Like calling you Debbie if your name is Deborah. ;)

I'm still curious how it started, too.

As for that ".", I've always figured it meant something like "your post isn't worth typing a header on a response to". I dunno!

[Cherchez la Femme]

2. I do apologize for the tardiness

I don't want to leave any bull$hit excuses like being busy, etc. but please believe my gratitude is sincere :)

Thank you for the explanations. The response of a period alone sounds right on. The only thing I thought of it as literal and in agreement -- like saying 'Period' to say there can be no argument, then I saw someone confront another saying how they didn't have to be negative.
I never even knew it was snarky LOL
It seems to me from what I've read that there must be more to Democrat/Democratic than just laziness in typing, hence disregard to ones person; or even 'nicknames'. It appears to be grammatical (my worst subject, but then anyone reading my posts can see that! LOL) denoting a deliberate insult; and seems to have a political connotation but what connotation(s) I have NO idea.

May I ask, where do you live?

Thanks again, & nice to meet you!

[iverglas]

3. one of the resident Canadians

and lest I was unclear -- 'twasn't I who gave you the star! You already had it when I saw the notes, and besides, it takes me an hour to figure out my paypal account once a year to renew my own.

There is definitely a nasty right-wing overtone to "Democrat". They's the people who use it, and they use it for reasons of their own, which appear to be of the schoolyard taunt variety. I was not prone to that sort of thing as a child, but I do remember following a classmate one time joining in the chorus of "Constance! Constance!" being sung at her, who preferred to be called Connie. That's what "Democrat" (as an adjective) always reminds me of.

Hereabouts, its use is an indication that someone (a) is not who s/he says s/he is, or (b) has picked up a bad habit from overexposure and doesn't know its provenance.

[ismnotwasm]

4. Hey welcome

I don't pay enough attention to "computer speak" although I've gotten better at it. I thought is was a way of saying ready, set go, on a controversial topic, but I dunno. They'll be people in here who can fill you in.

I read your post, and I'm very glad you got a star.

(I was going to start a thread complaining about a Midol commercial I saw, "Reverse the Curse", but I'd much rather welcome you!)

[bliss_eternal]

5. Perhaps it would be helpful...

...if when you see such "abbreviations" utilized, you directly asked those what their intent is. I don't mean to be rude in saying this, I've just found it generally serves to cut to the chase to ask the source of something when seeking direct meaning. There are so many abbreviations and meanings of things on-line. Asking away from the source, is asking someone to second-guess the original intent and meaning--which may not really help you learn or understand what something means.

While there are some "standard meanings" in terms of internet abbreviations, some are personal to the individual, or their shorthand for saying something. In other words, only the person utilizing it would be able to tell you what they mean by it.

Considering how new you are, you probably weren't aware that there have been many threads started all over DU direcly addressing feminists regarding the current primary race. There are also quite a few people so bold as to start threads about women's issues all over DU--not just here in feminism. But of course, not all that create threads that address feminists are actually those that could be considered "pro-woman" (or feminists) themselves. ;)

Enjoy!:hi:

[iverglas]

6. hmm

The two things in question were:

"Democrat" (as an adjective)
- in theory, nobody should be using that here at DU, as I understand it. Asking someone why s/he is using it pretty much amounts to "you're a troll, aren't you?" -- when the person could just have absorbed a meme without in any way meaning to adopt the intent behind it.

"."
- unless the post in question was a direct response to a post of one's own, it might look a little odd to butt into someone else's conversation about something substantive with a question entirely about form, and such a question might tend to be taken the wrong way no matter how framed.

Maybe the background here isn't clear. In the recent thread in this group suggesting that someone needed a star, there is a link to a thread elsewhere by Cherchez la Femme. I followed it out of curiosity, and ended up posting in it. She had said something there about wanting to post in Feminists but being unable, which was why I said I'd wondered when we'd see her, since someone kindly gave her a star.

I'm not sure here, but it seems, bliss, that you took some issue with something having to do with C la F's thread or the proposal for a star, or something. I don't mean to be rude in saying this either, but it might just be better to say it.

Maybe she could propose her subject again here in a new thread, and we could have a reasoned discussion of it (in contrast to the one already held elsewhere, where the partisanship that was not actually expressed or invited by the post got splattered all over the thread anyway). I thought it was quite an interesting question and one worth examining by feminists.


edited ... ajetive ...

[bliss_eternal]

7. Maybe you should re-read my edited post.

...and if you have issue w/something I say to someone else, maybe you could address me personally (and privately) :) ...so as to allow things to be "between individuals" and not become a huge thing--oh (on edit) and if you could be so kind as to show me the respect to allow me my opinion and my right to address anyone, any way I like, as I do others. FYI--I'm an adult, as such I don't need instruction on how to post, who to address and how. Try to keep that in mind.

Thanks!

[iverglas]

8. I'm just confused

Seems to me you might have taken that advice before offering it. Sorry, bliss, but it seems that you're the one who has quite an issue with C la F, and I don't know what it is, but what sure looks like a patronizing lecture delivered in public with a friendly wave, not to mention the initial curt and quite gratuitous "not my business" remark, doesn't really seem to be a good way of dealing with it.

[bliss_eternal]

9. Iverglas...

Again, I've edited my post (try reading it...you won't find the same "issues" in it now). I did so BEFORE you showed me such great disrespect as to feel the need to "advise me." Since you couldn't be bothered to at least bring whatever your issue (or confusion) was to me privately don't bother addressing me again in the future. Thanks.

Oh and btw, how I address anyone but you--none of YOUR business.
Given you feel it's YOUR PLACE (and business) to tell me how I should and shouldn't speak to others (relative newbies btw) you and I have absolutely nothing more to say to one another.

edited for typo and clarity.

[iverglas]

10. and if I do?

I've fallen down the rabbit hole, I'm afraid.

if you could be so kind as to show me the respect to allow me my opinion and my right to address anyone, any way I like, as I do others. FYI--I'm an adult, as such I don't need instruction on how to post, who to address and how. Try to keep that in mind.
... you showed me such great disrespect as to feel the need to "advise me."

Now pretend you are Cherchez la Femme reading your first post in this thread, including as edited (me not seeing what wonderful thing the edit accomplished at all), and see whether she might not just as easily have said what I've quoted above in response. Just as I might do in response to what you have said to me. You started the public lecturing, not me. If you think advice should be given in private, give it in private. Don't give it in public and complain when a member of the public responds to it.

I have an idea of what your issue with her thread in GDP might be. Me, I was a Biden supporter. No dog in the race now. No partisanship as between your candidate and the other one. Think they both suck. Which I'm sure is just about as bad. I'm afraid I just don't know the rules of this game.

Guess you didn't like my answer to that question about names, either. Guess I'll go to the garden and dig through about six feet of snow and find some worms to eat. Or just look around the rabbit hole here ...


... I just thought I'd edit too, just for fun, because there's been so much of it that I seem to be having a conversation with myself at this point anyhow, replying to things that no longer exist as I have been doing.

"And if I do?" was in response to a public instruction not to speak to you again, in case any confused member of the public is looking in ... oh no, wait, that part is still there, just beefed up a bit ...

I wish I had a clue what was going on.

[bliss_eternal]

11. Presumptions.

You are basing all of this on your own assumptions. Btw, that's how misunderstandings occur. You haven't bothered to "ask me" anything--you've just made a bunch of presumptions here.

Assume whatever you like, it's of no consequence to me. The fact that you would "assume" instead of showing me the respect to ask my opinion in an appropriate manner...well....again, as such--I really don't think you and I have anything to talk about.

[iverglas]

12. okay

In response to BlueIris's suggestion that someone give Cherchez la Femme a star, you posted something.

You then apparently thought better of what you posted, so you deleted it.

But you didn't just delete it. You said "none of my business".

If something were none of my business, I would just say nothing. I wouldn't say something that clearly conveyed the impression that I had something unpleasant to say but I'd decided not to say it.

"Passive agressive" was what came to my mind when I read that.

You're seriously suggesting that I should have asked you in private about a remark that *you* chose to make in public? Why would that be? What rule is there that I must ask you privately about a remark you choose to make in public?

You're the one who made the remark, in public, that very clearly conveyed that you had something negative to say, and had said it, but had chosen to delete it, but weren't quite ready to let it go and really wanted to let it be known that you had something to say. Quite the dance. And quite unfair to the person who seems to have been the target of it, if you ask me. But you don't have to ask me. The fact that it was done in public means that it can be responded to in public by anyone who chooses to.

You also appear to have some issue with me. I have not the slightest hint of an inkling of what it is. Is it recent? Is it of long standing? Might you have told me privately rather than kicking up this massive stink in public about something that in no way warranted it, and that you chose to kick off in public in the first place?

Will I have responded to a totally different message by the time I finish from the one that was there when I started?

If you don't want to explain what your little "none of my business" remark meant, that's your choice. I just wouldn't go acting like it isn't there and it doesn't mean something. And if you're not going to state what it does mean, you don't really get to toss a tantrum about how someone interprets it.

[bliss_eternal]

13. By the way...

...not that I owe you a damn thing, but let me be crystal clear about one thing--I've gone out of my way on DU to NOT speak any support for ANY of these candidates. I haven't been negative or positive about them. I've spoke a bit about why here (in feminism).

So again, you are assuming quite a bit.

Your choice today was to lecture me about my words to another poster. Again none of your business. I've always shown YOU respect. As such, if I seemed to behave out of character, maybe you could have asked me why (privately).

You're within your rights to share your opinion about that, or anything else--as you have, but telling me how I should be addressing people... :eyes: Save it for someone else.

I see that the last time I considered placing you on ignore (for similar comments you made to someone else) I was accurate, and should have gone with my initial instincts about YOU.

[iverglas]

14. ah, choice

Your choice today was to lecture me about my words to another poster.

I chose to respond to the lecture you delivered to another poster. Might I point out that YOU have assumed an awful lot based on the date when an individual formally became a member of DU. I think, from reading things said by the individual, e.g.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5011068&mesg_id=5021462

that you are the one making some huge unwarranted assumptions, and addressing someone else from those assumptions rather than ASKING the individual about whatever you needed to know.


So again, you are assuming quite a bit.

I'm assuming that you posted something negative in response to the post suggesting that someone give Cherchez la Femme a star. At least, something you thought better of, or wanted to give the impression you had thought better of. That really is a pretty safe assumption when someone deletes something s/he has said and says "none of my business".

And you have had EVERY OPPORTUNITY to explain what you meant by that, and have chosen not to.


Telling me how I should be addressing people... :eyes: Save it for someone else.

Telling me what to do ... :eyes: Save it for someone else.

Any chance you're getting it yet?

If you don't want comment from a third party about something you say to someone, SAY IT IN PRIVATE.

If you don't want "assumptions" made about something you say, say something that doesn't require interpretation and guesswork. Or just exercise some restraint and don't say it.


I see that the last time I considered placing you on ignore (for similar comments you made to someone else)

Well, that means about as much to me as if you'd said nothing at all. Except that nothing at all wouldn't have been an unsubstantiated allegation that someone did something objectionable. Which that is.

If I'm supposed to have some idea what you're talking about, I'm just a miserable failure. Because I have none.

If you object to something I say to someone, you feel quite free to say so at the time, 'k? Or hell, store it up so you can drag out some meaningless reference to it sometime in future in an effort to make me look like some repeat offender against good manners without actually having to offer any proof.


I was accurate, and should have gone with my initial instincts about YOU.

Will it disappoint you terribly if I say I've never had any instincts at all about you, because I really just don't give a crap about personalities or who thinks what about whom? Including who thinks what about me. I don't look to the places like this for validation. I look at places like this because I'm curious all the time, and there are sometimes things of interest here. There are also sometimes people being treated unpleasantly here, and while I don't give a crap if someone wants to treat me unpleasantly, I know not everyone withstands that sort of thing as easily, and some may deserve a little aid to level the playing field.


If you're going to ignore me, could you start now?

[bliss_eternal]

15. Always happy to oblige.

Quote:
If you're going to ignore me, could you start now?

There are certain issues the rules of this board dictate can't be done. Which is why I attempted to suggest you could have pm'd me about my choices, if they were of concern to you. It was my attempt at exercising some tact and courtesy, do forgive me (pesky manners). My choice of not explaining all my actions (publicly) was an extension of that, as was my editing some of my prior comments--during the editing period that DU so graciously affords us.

[iverglas]

16. nah, that wasn't ignoring me

that was trying to get the last word.


I guess, in the universe of people who use the passive aggressive thingy called the ignore feature, you did.

[lukasahero]

17. Welcome to the FG, Cherchez

I'm sure you won't believe this but there actually ARE threads on DU that don't turn into pissing contests.

:hi:

[bliss_eternal]

18. I'd like to offer my sincere apologies...

...for the role I've played in derailing what should have been a thread to welcome you to this forum.
I am very sorry.

Best,
bliss

[cally]

19. Welcome

I'm glad you are here and I'm sorry you were laid off. I haven't been on DU much so I didn't see your earlier thread. Frank Luntz, a GOP polster and sometimes pundit, issued a list of words Repubs should use and not use. That's why you only hear the RW talking heads use death tax instead of estate tax. One of the words was to use Democrat, instead of Democratic, because it sounds like rat.

[femrap]

20. Welcome to DU....

It's usually not so nasty here. I missed the last Primary....I was an ABB (anybody but bush) and wasn't really smitten with any of the candidates in '04. But I liked Kerry and worked hard for him. Now I just see another Skull and Bones Yale guy when I look at him.

Good luck with securing a fabulous career that is a reflection of your true abilities.