a weird question

[ChairmanAgnostic]

on a couple of forums, I find that I cannot reply to the original post, and sometimes to a response or two.
Yet on the same session, I can reply or post without problems. It only happens on Gen. Disc. Politics and Editorials, and then rarely.

So. . . . . Am I beginning to think like George W. Bush, or am I missing something? I suppose living life under a delusion would be fine, if I get to pick my own delusion.

[Kerrytravelers]

1. Could someone have blocked you?

If it says "can not reply," then it's a block. Otherwise, it might be a technical bug.

[BuyingThyme]

2. You've been blocked by people who can't stand your

responses.

Go ahead. Just try to respond.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. oh. damn. Didn't know I pissed peoples off.

sorry.

[BuyingThyme]

6. Not me.

You can respond to any insane thing I say.

:hi:

[question everything]

10. However, you can always start a new thread with your reply

except in the I/P forum, where new threads have to start with a news story.

(wonder how they are handling it there!)

[jgraz]

15. damn, don't apologize!

If someone blocked you, it's likely that they are a coward who can't handle real debate. It's a shame that the mods couldn't see this coming with their new abortion of a feature.

Now -- apologize for saying you're sorry!! :evilgrin:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

44. erh ah I'm sorry that I'm sorry? and I apologize for the apology.

I think.

[in_cog_ni_to]

28. See? This feature is so hurtful. I detest it. Now, whoever blocked you, just got GREAT satisfaction

from witnessing your dismay. The whole thing SUCKS, IMO.

[BuyingThyme]

30. Yes.

[SteppingRazor]

4. Likely the new ignore feature:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=announcement&id=248

[porphyrian]

5. You've been blocked by whoever you're trying to respond...to. (That sounds funny.)

It's a new-ish feature. Apparently, your opinion is not valued by some here, and they'd rather not hear from you.

[blm]

26. Though it was supposed to be a block from stalkers, it's used as a block against

viewpoints. The funny thing is that some who stalked me go on my threads to post attacks and have me blocked from answering them on my own threads.

heheh...it takes all kinds, I guess. But, I won't be goaded to stalk back, use the ignore or block just to reciprocate an idiotic action.

[porphyrian]

32. While I'm not personally in favor of it, I'm not going to tell people how they have to use DU.

It would be like telling people they have to read the paper a certain way - "Sports section FIRST! Then, Editorials!" Let them cut their own noses off if that's what they want. They're the ones missing out. I'm with you, though.

[pitohui]

7. yeah, it's babies acting like it's high school blocking an unpopular viewpoint

this is the worst "feature" ever, meant solely to hurt the feelings of those who are blocked from presenting an unpopular point of view

it's a cruel way to say, "nah, nah, we don't like you"

i wouldn't donate again because of this "feature" and i am probably going to leave the site when my subscription runs out because of it

there are too many other opportunities in life to be cruel to come get more on the internet

i guess if you never have anything deep or difficult or controversial to say, you would never be affected by it, so be flattered that at least you are not just echoing a herd mentality -- they wouldn't try to block you out if you were just parroting their own views

[Lex]

8. Yeah, it definitely effects some people a lot more than others.

nt

[fooj]

12. Group "bully" mentality...

Won't allow it in MY classroom. There you have it.

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. eventually, they may even publish a list of those on the blocked list.

The whole thing is so juvenile. It reminds me of grade school petty fights between cliques. It's so damn silly. Can't adults just ignore people they don't like without having to do it with technology? I've never even used the old 'ignore' button...I did it all by myself! Don't like a poster? Pass on by! It's so simple!

[fooj]

19. Hmmmm...

"Blocked" list or Black list?

[in_cog_ni_to]

23. exactly. It will be meant to embarrass those who 'cause problems' and perhaps make them think twice

before being a meanie.:eyes:

[fooj]

25. Irony...

is the "meanies" are most of the members who are doing the "blocking"...

Like I said "BULLY" mentality abounds!

[in_cog_ni_to]

29. SO TRUE, fooj!

:(

[Virginian]

22. You can block a person, not a viewpoint.

Apparently, someone doesn't want to argue with you anymore.

Not everyone is here to fight over things. There are enough other places where you can get into a knock down, drag out argument.

Try presenting your point of view in a less confrontational manner. Most people respond better to that, anyway.

If you want to fight, I can suggest a few places where that seems to be the norm. I'm glad DU is a place where I can express viewpoints and not be attacked with personal insults and confrontation. I have changed my opinion on something because of open discussion whereas I would have dug in to defend myself if the response had been volatile.

[fooj]

31. Do you know for a fact that a point of view was presented in a confrontational manner?

Talk about insults and personal attacks.
I think the member was simply asking a question. Wow. Unbelievable.

[notadmblnd]

9. I was surprised that it happened to me too

I'm usually pretty quiet. Oh well, I guess some people aren't as open minded as they pretend.

[uppityperson]

21. Me too.

1 I understand, another I am confused by but cannot ask why since I cannot. If I could ask, I wouldn't have to. Oh well. It happens but is offputting. 1 trial in this and I don't think I'll use it again, would rather just not reply and ignore on my own.

[notadmblnd]

27. exactly...

I don't mind being disagreed with. And sometimes if the adversary has a convincing enough argument, there's even a chance that they'll change my mind. But to shut someone off because they have a difference of opinion, I think is very closed minded.

[jgraz]

11. Worst. Feature. Ever.

With one feature, the mods have changed the culture of DU from one of open debate to one of cliques and personal reality bubbles. If I wanted that, I'd sign up for Friendster.

[fooj]

13. Honestly...

that's what I thought the mods signed up for. Enforcing the rules. Oh well. Silly me.

[jgraz]

14. Classic engineering mistake: trying to solve a social problem with software features

Can't recall a single time when that turned out well.

[Lex]

17. I thought that people who signed up agreed to follow the rules

first and foremost.

[fooj]

18. Me, too.

Part of the package, IMO.

[Orsino]

20. Different rules.

From supporting vigorous debate, we have become open to whimsical and/or vindictive suppression of viewpoints.

I haven't noticed this becoming a burden yet, but am dismayed to hear that it's begun to work the way I feared.

[jgraz]

53. It's never worked any other way

I'd bet that there have been zero cases of genuine harassment stopped by this new feature. From what I've seen, it's being used by the usual set of thin-skinned cowards to prevent reasoned responses to their latest silly rants.

[Catherine Vincent]

24. You must be on someone's iggy list.

:)

[walldude]

33. In response to all the responses of your OP

I have a question for all of you. You seem to really dislike this new "feature", one of you even called people who use it "cowards". So then am I to assume since you are all for people being able to express their thoughts without "interference" that you think freepers should be allowed in here? While I personally have never used the ignore or this new feature, I can see where it might be useful for some DU'ers.

[BuyingThyme]

34. Yes, we love Freepers.

:silly:

[uppityperson]

35. No.

people meaning just to disrupt, those can be gone without any problem. There already is a mechanism in place to deal with that. But it would be nice to know why am blocked, if it was a particular thing or just in general.

[porphyrian]

38. Hmm, that might be an interesting feature...

...when blocking an individual, the blocker has to put in the message the blocked sees, or something to that effect. I don't know.

[sammythecat]

49. No, this is the age of Gitmo.

You can be "detained" without charge. If they feel like doing it, they can. Simple as that.

It's as if the government issued guns to the general population along with a license to shoot at will. The gun is free and the license requires no qualification. Somebody ticks you off, shoot 'em.

[porphyrian]

36. I'm not entirely against that, though DU was designed more as a refuge from them.

It might be very cool to have at least one forum where they could participate without having to sneak in pending tombstoning. Ironically, this would probably be what would get the ignore features the most use.

[fooj]

37. It has nothing to do with "interference"...

When you and I signed up for DU, we agreed to follow the rules, yes? If one doesn't adhere to the rules they are tombstoned.

I've never personally used the ignore feature, either. I've only used the "alert" feature a few times. IMHO, this new "addition" does not serve open debate well. Just my 2 cents...

[Catherine Vincent]

39. Hi fooj!

:hi:

[fooj]

40. Hiya!

B-)

[walldude]

50. Personally I agree with you, heated debate is always more fun

plus as soon as someone starts calling you names you have already won. However I don't think the DU Admin did this with the idea of squashing debate there must have been a legetimate reason for it. I do feel for people who have been blocked without knowing why or who. Like all good Democrats maybe we can find a compromise on this issue...

on edit: or maybe the new feature was the compromise.. I guess I'll have to go through that thread now, I didn't bother to read past skinners opening as it's a feature I wouldn't personally use.

[in_cog_ni_to]

41. There's a difference between a freeper and a Democrat/Liberal/Progressive.

In a matter of minutes they are exposed and usually tombstoned.

[sammythecat]

43. Isn't that what the alert button is for?

To alert the moderators to a possible freeper or disruptive poster. They can decide if the poster is offensive enough to be banned or "tombstoned" or whatever.

I agree with those who call this feature "juvenile". The potential for petty-minded abuse is far more likely than that of "stalkers". If someone is stalking then the moderators should deal with that person. Isn't that a big reason to have moderators?

I think George Bush would like this feature very much. He's petty and juvenile and does much the same thing whenever he "talks" with his screened audiences. He blocks any attempt by stalkers and disrupters, but, at the same time ensures there is no legitimate protest.

[in_cog_ni_to]

45. Great post!

Welcome to DU, BTW...:hi:

[sammythecat]

47. I've been away for awhile and now

I've been back for a few months. Thanks for the welcome.

My response was inspired by one of your replies. You hit the mark with "juvenile", "petty", and "cliques".

All cliques are petty and juvenile, and there most definitely are cliques here on DU. It's dismaying but true. It's inhibiting to think that if you piss off one, you piss off all. This new feature just increases the inhibition tenfold. Cliques and inhibition do not belong on a political discussion forum.

I'm grateful to anyone who volunteers to be a moderator here. I wouldn't want the job. However, if actually "being" a moderator is too much for someone, they should resign and let someone else take over. I wouldn't blame them.

I see absolutely no valid reason for having this feature on a moderated political discussion forum. None at all.

[BuyingThyme]

42. If you have been blocked within this thread, POST HERE:

(Be sure to include a reference number.)

[me b zola]

46. This is what I was afraid of when the new "feature" went into effect

You and the other posters on this thread who have mentioned that they have been blocked by other posters I find to be thoughtful, informative, and likable posters. Not one of you I have ever seen harassing anyone or being disruptive to discussion. Not a single one of you, not once.

I agree with the posters who say that this is the "worst feature ever". Soon it seems that DU will be broken up into circles of people who share the similar points of view and there will be no more debate.

I haven't been posting a lot lately, so I haven't yet tried to post and have been blocked--yet--but it's just a matter of time before I do. Please don't let this stop you from posting because a few have chosen to stick their fingers in their ears and sing "la la la, I can't hear you". Your posts and view points are appreciated by most of us.

[Bluebear]

48. 'I haven't been posting a lot lately'

Which is a shame, because I love your voice here.

[me b zola]

51. Thank you, that's the nicest thing that anyone has said to me in a while

:hug:

[blm]

52. same here...rarely disagree but even when I do, me b zola's opinions are still earnest.

Earnesty counts alot in my book.