We're not going to reach our goal this fund drive. Let's talk.

[Skinner]

So, it's now Friday, and as I post this we haven't even reached 600 donations yet. Unless we experience some kind of miraculous and unprecedented turn-around, we aren't going to reach our goal of 1000 donations by Sunday night. But before you stop reading, the point of this post is not to beg you to dig deep and donate and put us over the top. On the contrary, the point of this post is to tell you this:

Message received.

You don't like what DU has become. Maybe you have very specific complaints, or maybe you don't really know exactly what it is that you don't like. But what you do know is that you wish it was more like the old DU. A community. A place that was special. Where we had big disagreements, but at least you felt like we all had something in common.

Yeah, I miss that DU, too.

I miss it so much that it makes my heart ache. I lie awake at night agonizing over it. I can barely bring myself to read my email anymore. I'm burned out and tired.

We (the DU Admins) knew that having a Democratic Administration would make things a lot more complicated and difficult here on DU, but I don't think we really had any clue how difficult it would be. I know that many of you believe the solution is simple. I know this because you send me scolding shame-on-you emails demanding that I do {whatever} and then DU would be better. I wish I shared your certainty.

We have been very cautious and deliberate in our attempts to improve the way we run DU, and I think -- especially on the moderator-side -- we have made a lot of very important progress. But the whole effort has the feeling of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Our approach has been to "do what we've always been doing, only better," but I am starting to think that much more radical change is necessary.

Here's the problem in a nutshell: Back when Bush was President, he represented the center of gravity in politics -- the focal point that determined "Which side are you on?" -- and everyone on DU actually was on the same side. Now that Barack Obama is President, he has become the center of gravity. I think it's clear that we still broadly agree on the issues, but we disagree on how best to get there, how long it should take, and how much compromise we are willing to accept. Those are the disagreements that matter now. To be blunt, we are not all on the same side anymore.

Imagine if during the Bush Administration, Democratic Underground had welcomed people who thought the president was doing a bad job, *and* people who thought the president was doing a good job. DU would have sucked. Sure, it might have been worth the effort to stop by every once in a while to argue with conservative idiots, but nobody would have felt like DU was their home, their safe-haven, their community.

This is the situation we face. Nobody is "safe" anymore. DU doesn't "belong" to anyone. We all want this to feel like a community, but we have two fairly large groups of people who each seem to believe that they are the rightful heirs to this community, and that the other side doesn't even have a legitimate claim to be here.

And here I am, grasping to the naive and outdated hope -- against all the available evidence -- that maybe we can all figure out a way to share DU.

I could "solve" our problems pretty easily by picking a side. If I did that, at least the people who would remain here would know that they own DU. They would know that they have a home and a safe haven again. And they would take comfort from knowing (finally) that the DU Admins are on their side, rather than cold, distant, unpredictable creatures whose allegiances are not entirely clear and who could turn on them at any moment.

But I am not prepared to give DU to either side. I see all the people who are still here (thank you for still being here, by the way, despite everything) -- some posting and some, sadly, only lurking -- and I see the people who built this community. Great people. Generous, big-hearted, smart, interesting people. Some of you might post strange and unpleasant things now -- including some things that cut very deeply -- but I remember what you were like before, and I remember how much I liked you then.

So we keep doing what we're doing. But I harbor this simmering doubt. I feel obligated to censor people, even though I have never liked doing it, and like it even less now than I ever have. I feel obligated to serve as an authority figure to a community of people (including myself) who are naturally skeptical of authority. I feel obligated to keep deleting posts and banning people, even though I know that each time I do it serves as "proof" that I have already picked a side, that I am already hopelessly biased, and that I cannot be trusted. I long to let you all take responsibility for yourselves, to give the community the ability to police itself and set its own limits, but in the past our efforts to do so have been rejected almost every time.

I think it might not be a bad thing that we're not going to reach our goal this fund drive. Perhaps it will provide us with justification to experiment with some really radical changes to this place. The Admins have discussed a lot of ideas, but we honestly don't know what's going to work, or what you all will be willing to accept. I think, to start, we're probably going to post some kind of member survey next week to better understand your attitudes, and get feedback on a bunch of different ideas. I'll be curious to learn if you are willing to try any of them.

Thanks for listening. And thank you for being part of this community.

[xchrom]

1. thanks for talking to us skinner.

i do think a lot of us are having financially difficult times.

several threads this week were eye openers.

[Donnachaidh]

23. that is a point that I see many people here and in other forums MISS

I'm really not sure that the lack of donations is due to unhappiness about board postings. I DO believe that the lack of donations is due to the FACT that many many of us are still hanging on by the skin of our teeth. the economy is in the crapper. The lack of donations reflects that FACT.

There is a LOT of pain out there, and many are keeping their net going only because it has become (sometimes) the only way to apply for jobs. That means that everything else they would normally give to has to be put off. Robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't an option for many who are long-term unemployed or underemployed. Because quite literally that few bucks they may have given in the past is now needed to pay for their kid's lunch at school, or to put a couple of gallons of gas in their car to look for work.

Times are much harder than anyone wants to acknowledge. :shrug:

[Frisbee]

259. Couldn't agree more...

I donated, but not nearly as much as I would like to have. Times are tight everywhere. But no matter what, DU is my home away from home.

[NikolaC]

1261. Same Here

I just got a job after being unemployed for a year. I wish that we could have donated more, but we can't until we get on a firmer footing. I appreciate DU a great deal. I have lurked more than posted over the last couple of years because things have gotten very intense and I would rather not get in the middle of the fight. I am addicted to reading DU though, it has been a daily ritual for me to come on here for the last few years.

[bobbolink]

542. Further, some of us are literally dying, and it doesn't matter to others.

It comes to the point where it is no longer possible to care when you aren't receiving care.

[laughingliberal]

1329. +1 nt

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

582. What Donnachaidh said. I gave $5 at the beginning of the year when I had a little bit to spare.

I'm on emergency unemployment now. I think, Skinner, perhaps the lack of donations is being taken too personally by the mods. I really think it's more about the economy and the fact that a lot of us are hurting right now. If the choice comes between paying for food and medicine and giving to DU, I'm going for the food and medicine.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

619. New Unemployment Claims SURGE, Hit Highest Level Since November 2009

Please consider this may be the more likely scenario. It's horrific out there.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/19/new-unemployment-claims-s_n_687420.html

<snip>

WASHINGTON (AP) -- New applications for unemployment insurance reached the half-million mark last week for the first time since November, a sign that employers are likely cutting jobs again as the economy slows.

The Labor Department said Thursday that initial claims for jobless benefits rose by 12,000 last week to 500,000, the fourth increase in the past five weeks. Wall Street economists forecast that claims would drop.

The four-week average, a less volatile measure, rose by 8,000 to 482,500, the highest since December. There were no special factors that distorted the numbers, a Labor Department analyst said.

The increase suggests the economy is creating even fewer jobs than in the first half of this year, when private employers added an average of about 100,000 jobs per month. That's barely enough to keep the unemployment rate from rising. The jobless rate has been stuck at 9.5 percent for two months.

<snip>

[zanana1]

1328. Exactly.

Here's my $5.00. I'm afraid it's the best I can do. Maybe getting rid of some of the "extras" for awhile would help. There are ALOT of groups; maybe we just dont need that many.

[ChazII]

1344. My family is in the same boat.

I am lucky to have a job but with two family members and high medical bills as well as hospital, DU will have to wait.

[babsbunny]

1064. I am not happy that our Prez is Bush lite. He isn't Prosecuting

Folks who allowed Torture. And I hate the unrecommend. I think we should start over. And I have no money either. I don't want to be in America anymore. I want to run far from here.

[maryf]

1379. I really hate the unrecommend too.

Maybe without it we'd see which types of forums would really be popular. I think I've used it once and was ashamed of myself...

[Stardust]

1385. I hate the unrec, too. I vowed not to donate until it was gone, but caved

time and again. I cannot fathom why anyone would think they serve any positive purpose.

[defendandprotect]

1704. IMO, it's hurting the line up of articles here ....don't know what others think????

The quality of the "news" articles that remain visible to the members

isn't what it used to be!

On the other hand, seems some members who used to be vigilant about posting

articles may have been some of those "purged"???

[RKP5637]

1623. I know exactly what you mean. I think exactly the same! I just do not like

what the country has become in my long lifetime. It's no longer about "We the People." The majority of the people IMO. I feel duped, manipulated and propagandized anytime I listen to MSM, politicians and often much of the internet.

[Mimosa]

1224. ^ Donna's Right: It's the Economy , Not the Politics Here ^

I donated what I could. Just means eating less beef.

[SCantiGOP]

170. whenever I feel discouraged

I watch this short video and remember how it felt on November 4, 2008:


Run time: 00:27
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZYjVL1sc7w

[calimary]

919. That was a GREAT video, SCantiGOP! Thanks for posting!

I watch this short video and remember how it felt on November 4, 2008:


Run time: 00:27
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZYjVL1sc7w


Just wanted to be able to find it later - I'm putting it in my journal too.

And Skinner - I don't know what the answer is to the questions in your OP. I'm just glad DU is here, warts and all, to post, to vent, to read, to lurk, to learn, to be broadened and enlightened and expanded, and yeah, sometimes infuriated. But at least we know we're among friends and family here - and certainly friends and family argue. But they're still friends and family after all is said and done.

Keep up the good work (or, hell, even what you might be concerned that might be bad work)! We all needed, bickering as we go.

And btw - I also agree that plain ol' economics may play a larger part here. There's LOTSA hurt out there, in the DU community and beyond. Unless you're a major corporation, you are probably feeling pain - and maybe a great deal of pain.

We love you Skinner, and we love DU!

And - uh - to my fellow DUers - because I MYSELF love DU and hate to see people unhappy and hurting, please allow me to be a Machiavellian pig-dog for a moment here (begging your forgiveness in advance):

If you're having a glum moment, PLEEEEEEEZE consider a little tonic (at least a temporary one) that I put in the sticky collection - about my kid's band. Please go check out their music (if you like alt/rock music, that is) and rock out for a few moments and forget about your troubles for maybe three minutes or so, at a time. You might actually feel a little better for a little while. Won't cost anything just to click on "PLAY!"

http://www.acidicband.com
http://www.facebook.com/ACIDICband
http://www.myspace.com/ACIDICband

[femrap]

415. +1

It's the economy, stupid.

The DLCers and the Progressives will always be at odds.

[tblue]

Truth is, I think a lot of us are using Facebook now.

I do. And I have sort of created my own DU-type community. But DU is still important to me. Maybe, Skinner, we need to create a stronger DU presence on Facebook. I think we could leverage that somehow. If I think of any good ideas for how to do that, I'll shoot you a msg.

[Capn Sunshine]

848. hey, good luck with THAT

I don't think DU has ever tracked your retail preferences and taste in site visiting and and needs you might post about and sold them to the highest bidder.

Facebook does. Why do you think Newscorp bought a chunk of MySpace? Don't be naiive enough to think they aren't coming after Facebook next.

Whatever you do on DU, I sincerely doubt it is as public or your web preferences as commercialized and filed as they are with Facebook.

[femrap]

979. I hadn't thought of that...

I don't do Facebook...something about the concept bugs me. I would never put my real name out there or a picture. Maybe it's because I attract 'weirdos' IRL and I don't want to start the same attraction online.

Plus I'm old. And I love privacy.

[LostinVA]

1255. You can block everything and everyone except who you want

[femrap]

1347. Maybe I'll look into it....

Thanks.

[Kali]

708. another here

I managed this drive (because I haven't looked at my bills this month yet - something may be short but not DU this time - heh) but I know last drive I almost didn't make it at all.

I know there is fighting over real issues but it doesn't really bother me that much, I am sorry people are feeling left out of the community they helped form.

I do hate seeing the stupid shit from last year reappearing in the lounge, like some kind of sick anniversary event.

[Plucketeer]

782. What xchrom says....

but,.... The end of this month, I'll have been a proud DUer for 3 years. I'd guess that fact denies me the ability to recall the "good old days" of DU. But reading your post, Skinner - the thing that whacked me right betwixt the peepers is that your summation is almost exactly the predicament that makes the Democratic Machine to seem unable to move with clarity and focus.
With the GOP, you have legions of dullards who can't be bothered to sort things out objectively. It's SO easy to point them in one direction. Kinda like iron filings aligning themselves with magnetic lines of force. It's not a fraternity for thinking folks.

The flip side is a community of thinkers. Lots an lots of folks with receptive, reflective, conceptive noggins. Folks that actually KNOW what compassion is, and don't have to have catchy slogans to remind them of it. Folks that think outside of their own selfish interests - free of predjudice and presumption. These points (qualities) and more make for a mix so complex that it oft times defies any attempt to summarize it. That is the Democratic party - how COULD DU be expected to even come close to the hypnotic trance allegiance that the faithful of Fox "news" perform under???

Stop losing sleep, Skinner. There was a revered leader who once observed that you can't please everybody all the time. I donated cause I can, but I know alot of folks who are trying to figure out how they're gonna eat. And that's no joke! Local food bank shelves here are BARE - not just skimpy, but BARE. That's never happened before.

[klook]

1493. Great post

Astute summary of the differences between GOP "iron filings" and Dem unherdable cats.

[roguevalley]

1404. I am waiting for October when I can re-up. I have never been so

flat busted. This place is my refuge and I've always been a paying member. I will again, Skinner. I wish everyone would give a dollar each time then this place would sing.

[Broken_Hero]

1748. Thats the reason why I haven't donated

credit cards are tight, and our money is being spread between 4 households.

[tallahasseedem]

2. Skinner, I completely agree.

There are many times that I have thought of you and the rest of the crew wondering how in the hell you can deal with all of this. Democratic Underground is not what it used to be, but I will continue to support it because I believe that we can, one day, get back.

God Speed.

[H2O Man]

3. I will be

sure to put a check in the mail early next week. DU is definitely the best internet site for progressive and liberal democrats.

[hlthe2b]

413. Plus we've got H2O Man....

:toast:

[mzmolly]

617. You contribute so much, regardless

H20 Man. :hi:

[bdamomma]

1370. well said H2O man I still think DU is the best.

I love the diversity here.

[CurtEastPoint]

4. Thanks, Skinner. I just donated...not much, but I did. DU is special to me. n/t

[Maeve]

5. Sympathies, Boss

Things change, but I still think Will Rogers got it right..."I don't belong to an organized political party; I'm a Democrat." And that's more obvious when we're in power than when we're not.

edited to add: well, you're one donation closer, anyway!
DU Admin and mods are the best on the Internet!!!

[bobbolink]

576. The people in Will Rogers time didn't talk to each other with such hatefulness.

They didn't get death threats from expressing their view.

The atmosphere in this country and on DU has become hateful because we accept it as inevitable. Older generations are appalled.

[awoke_in_2003]

1191. as I mentioned downthread...

death threats are okay if you are a good writer :sarcasm:

[bobbolink]

1375. Even if you're a mediocre writer with a big ego.

:evilgrin:

[Jamastiene]

1439. On DU nowadays...

Death threats = forgivable and the poster is un-TSed.

Posting the number 7 = un-fucking-forgivable, not no way, not no how, person stays TSed forever.

We can't talk about the issues that, at one time, meant something to the Democratic Party.

Equal rights?
-We are asking for too much when we ask to be considered equal human beings under the law.

Poverty? The Reagan Bootstrap Mantra gets hurled at you like you deserve only the worst life has to offer.

Care about Social Security? You are not being "pragmatic." Never mind the fact that the LAST Democratic president left Social Security stable and possibly savable.

Have a problem with re-segregating public schools AND only funding schools for the richer neighborhoods? Some teacher was mean to somebody when they were five fucking years old and that person never got over it. So, all teachers are bad and deserve public floggings and poor kids deserve to dodge bullets to go to underfunded public schools.

Health care? Somehow, it is ABSOLUTELY impossible for America to have health care like Canada's system. Canada has it, but, NOOOOOOOO, for us, IM-fucking-POSSIBLE.
Since when has America been the country that says "We can't?" Since when has America been the country that gives the fuck up before ever even trying to make something better?

And we are supposed to pretend that all of this is ok? Why is out and out Reaganism the new Democratic Party? There is so much wrong with this picture, I don't even know where to begin.

Sorry for ranting, but I heard what happened and I'm not happy about it. If it wasn't for the fact that I can find news here that MSM would never show, I'd probably quit loading DU any more, sadly. There is just something WAY wrong here.

[awoke_in_2003]

1706. we should have seen this coming...

when people defended the fact that Obama had Rick Warren say a prayer during the inauguration. Warren was, is, and always will be a homophobe. Our president reached out to him. Very fucking sad.

[truth2power]

1721. I agree with this statement in your post...

"If it wasn't for the fact that I can find news here that MSM would never show, I'd probably quit loading DU any more, sadly. There is just something WAY wrong here."

I feel I'm not allowed to express honest concerns that I have.

[babylonsister]

6. You're a great writer, Skinner, and I recognize the spot

you are in, between a rock and a hard place. Yes, it's worse here than it ever was under idiot son despite the fact we have a Dem president. I wish I could help you with an answer that wouldn't alienate anyone because we are all parts of this whole that is DU.

I hope you find the wisdom of Solomon, but will support whatever decisions you have to make to make DU a bit friendlier place to come to during these contentious times.

And thanks to all of you, and the mods, for all of your efforts.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. Thank you for sharing your thoughts...

Much appreciated! :hi: :hug:

[kpete]

8. ok, ok

i will donate, kpete

p.s. I think DU is still an amazing place!

[HereSince1628]

9. Of course, with rising unemployment it might not be the community

that's the problem with the fund raiser but people's anxiety about parting with their money.

Remember the polarity during the Democratic Primary? DU made it's contribution goals and the place held together.

[ChiciB1]

11. I'm Sure The Economy Is Having An Effect... But, Dig Deeper... It's NOT

completely what's going on! Do appreciate your comments though!

[geek tragedy]

13. The economy isn't any worse than it was during 2009. nt

[ChiciB1]

36. Well, I Was Trying To Be Diplomatic... But I'm More Inclined To Agree With

you "geek" because of my perceptions on situations that have evolved here! I post less and less myself and it really has nothing to do with the economy! But I've never had a lot of extra money to donate overall! Still I have managed to donate in the past!

And I also like your analogy about the 4 types! Having been attacked sternly in the past I've tried to veer away from getting into "dog fights" most of the time! Still I have been surprised at some of the UGLINESS that has gone on, as there are those who continually FIGHT no matter what!

While I disagree with issues, I don't stubbornly reply to the nastier comments made to me!

[SoCalDem]

59. I never even used the "ignore" feature until the primary season of '08

never felt the need to until then.. I know that most of the ones still on it have gone bye-bye, but I am still amazed at "some" people here who always have a devil's advocate stance on anything, and who always have something nasty to say in their attempt to disagree.

[hobbit709]

44. Is for some of us.

[SoCalDem]

62. I just found out last night that a friend of ours who's a single father of 3 teens lost his job.

He's very depressed & has been looking, but so far nothing.. In another month he'll be losinig his house:(

[Xenotime]

909. It continues to get worse with no hope in sight.

[bigtree]

541. definitely has gotten worse for me

I want to write an essay on how things just seem to disintegrating around me as a result of my impoverished condition. I've lost my car registration due to an inability to pay fees, but I'm still obligated to drive the car if I don't want to be homeless and hungry. Forced to be a criminal because of my inability to keep up with MVA fees . . . I feel like shit most of the time these days. I don't think I've ever been this pessimistic.

[stevenleser]

1126. What you are describing is me circa 2002-2005 after my 2001 layoff

I thought I would never get out from under it all. I'm still paying some things off from that period and my retirement was wiped out.

[Hissyspit]

73. It's CONTINUED bad.

It may not be worse, but two years of bad is worse than one year of bad. It's had a continued effect on people's abilities to give. (Not intending to deflect blame from the Bush years, just making a point on effect.)

[lark]

584. Continued BAD leads to hopelessness

In 2009, I think a lot of people still had hope for the economy. Now it's become so evident that the banks, Wall St., etc., don't give a fuck about anything other than their profits and are driving the country into bankruptcy by sitting on their money and not investing. Hope is in very short supply these days. I fear I will be supporting my 25 year old son forever, which puts a severe drain on my wallet. I will donate a few bucks, but I sure can understand why many can't afford to.

[Mariana]

135. That's true, but lots of people are in much worse shape now

than they were then just because it's been going on so long.

My best friend (not a member here) has been struggling for two years. She managed to keep her head above water until just recently, but she's finally gone under. She's gone through her savings and she's lost her business and she's losing her home and she and her daughter are going to be moving in with me soon, because she can't afford the up-front costs to rent a crappy two-room apartment.

There are so many others like her. Some, maybe many, are members here.

[classof56]

426. I commend you for being there for your friend, and opening your home to her.

I am deeply sorrowful that she and so many others are watching their lives turned upside down after years of being good, productive citizens who worked hard to make their own way through life and do the right thing. Bless you for caring!

[bdamomma]

1373. I commend you too, the disappearing middle class is

drowning it just really sucks.

[Sheepshank]

171. the one big difference betweem 2009 and 2010

is after a year of unemployment, all reserves are used up and the situation does feel much more frantic and dire. So on a personal level, it's worse.

[another saigon]

oh really?

because it is for my family. :(

[SammyWinstonJack]

501. For some of us it is. Guessing it isn't for you?

:shrug: In that case, good for you. :eyes:


I can't afford to donate to DU at this time.

[Lorien]

Neither can I. I've spent most of the past two years unemployed

I just picked up a bit of work, but the hole I find myself in is deep at this point. Creditors call nonstop. When you owe others money you really don't have the right to make donations.

[Mimosa]

1247. Lorien, I donated because of *wonderful* caring members like you.

It's tough for many of us.

I donated what little I could because I love you, Bobbolink, Octafish, defend and protect and more people than I can list!

[Lorien]

1266. Thanks Mimosa!

:hi: :loveya:

[muddrunner17]

590. Except that people have been struggling for another year.

[JDPriestly]

594. The economy for the corporations and rich is better, but for

those of us on DU, it is much worse. That is because more and more of us are recognizing that, although his economic policies have failed to revive the economy, Obama continues to whistle the corporate tune, continues to keep the same DLCers on his staff. And so we have lost hope. Those of us on Social Security, we who are retired or jobless, those who are homeless aren't just suffering economically, we are tired and depressed and disillusioned.

I, for one, post nearly every day. I know what my educational background and personal experience are, and I know that I have a broader knowledge base and better understanding of much of what is going on than many on Obama's cabinet and certainly most in Congress. I think there are a lot of DUers like me.

And I am frustrated because I know how much we need change at the top of our political structure, and I see how little change we are getting.

I stay on DU out of fear for what will happen if we don't at least have a sane person in the White House. But I am so disillusioned with Obama that I don't even know whether I will bother to vote again until he is out of office.

As for giving to DU, I give once a year. I'm not working. My husband and I are on Social Security, and frankly, unless we have major changes in this country, I do not see that the powers that be will keep their promises to me and other Social Security recipients who paid into the system expecting to be able to live security in our senior years. I have no hope until Obama and his corrupt team leave office, and we can finally select a candidate for the presidency who speaks for and acts for the people of the United States and not some corporate masters who could care less about our country and us.

It's not you, Skinner, it's Obama. He double-crossed a lot of people.

[Confusious]

608. The longer the bad economy goes on, the more people

Will withdrawl into their Bunkers.

[Confusious]

609. The longer the bad economy goes on, the more people

Will withdrawl into their Bunkers.

[sofa king]

I've been dead broke ever since I got here.

That was, what, seven years ago? I'm lucky I don't live under a bridge, and in point of fact I actually did for a while.

Some of us simply aren't competent or lucky enough to be able to afford to donate. I'm sorry for that, just as I am grateful for the person who donated for me this time.

Someday, perhaps, I'll be able to return the favor.

[Orsino]

710. More people jobless, wages down, and worry about joblessness up.

Yes, the economy's worse.

[Jax]

902. You got yours

from your posts that is all that matters to you.

sick shit.

[Lorien]

1122. I was wondering

who "ignored" is, but now I have an idea.

[xxqqqzme]

934. Maybe not for you!

The economy in California is much worse than '09. I could afford a few Angels games last summer. Even treated my sister and son to birthday games. Haven't been to one game this year. Money is very tight out here.

[laughingliberal]

1331. It is in some places. Unemployment is up in NV as are foreclosures. Can't speak for other places...

but we're dying here.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

53. I agree that the economy/jobs market.........

has more than a little to do with it. I've been out of work for 16 mos. and am embarking on a career as an adult college student/poverty explorer. I love DU, but my resources have necessarily become a bit more precious to me right now.

Skinner, I wish you the best and continued success. If I can find two spare pennies to rub together, they're yours.

[eppur_se_muova]

178. More than anxiety for some of us --

I'd like to donate, but just not right now. I'm planning to donate after the fund drive is over (that's when I might have some funds to deposit). It's not a sign of any disenchantment with DU.

[Subdivisions]

569. Nope, for me it's the community. There's a faction on this site that has

made me, and those who think like I do, feel unwelcome here. There have been numerous unfair bannings while others who were banned for grievous acts were allowed to return. We've been swarmed by that faction, who attempt to beat you down if you don't think exactly like they do. I have have attempted numerous times to alert admin/mods on certain things only to be ignored. And, a lot of my friends are now gone, either TSed for speaking their mind or they've simply faded away from what DU has become.

I feel that some in this community don't want me here and I don't feel like the DU admin appreciates me or my donation. I'm just a dollar sign here. I didn't used to feel that way.

[geek tragedy]

10. I'd say there are really four groups.

1) Hardcore Democratic partisans who are going to "have Obama's back" and see a lot (but certainly not all) of the criticism as destructive.
2) People who see Obama as part of the problem, not the solution. To them, he is someone to be opposed, period.
3) People who will often get upset about something (rightfully so most of the times) and rant about Obama this or that and have a generally low opinion of the administration's performance for long periods of time, but in the end they want him to succeed and support him;
4) the people who wish this was an awful lot less about Obama and more about issues

As a member of (1) who thinks the current President is flawed and sometimes foolish, I can recognize that no one should be driven out of DU for being a member of any of those broad groupings. At the same time, conflict between groups (1) and (2) is going to be inevitable. Because groups (1) and (2), while they have some ideological overlap, are partisan opponents just as much as Republicans and Democrats are partisan opponents.

Because, when someone says that Obama did to auto-workers what Reagan did to air traffic controllers (yes someone actually said that) we're beyond policy disagreements and into open partisan warfare.

[babylonsister]

16. You left out

rethugs; I'm convinced we've been infiltrated by trolls who have been smart enough not to get caught...yet.

[Monique1]

155. babylonsister

I have said this before also and got slammed!

[flamingdem]

191. I agree. The nastiness and negativity benefits the rethugs, divide and conquer nt

[librechik]

199. word, sister n/t

[City of Mills]

205. Absolutely

That's why I don't understand the shock and outrage when certain threads get unrecced right away, it could be agenda driven but it could easily be lurking Republican trolls too...why flip out about it?

[steve2470]

509. I agree with you

I've read many posts and wondered about their true allegiance. It seems like the motive is to tear down anything good about Obama and the party.

At some point, if you are that unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party, you are really better off (unless you just want to fight) going to another message board.

I'm definitely not 100% satisfied with the party or with Obama, but I'm willing to give the man credit where credit is due. He's a LOT better than Bush and the R's.

[The Green Manalishi]

1182. That is *EXACTLY* the kind of statement that pisses me off.

" At some point, if you are that unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party, you are really better off (unless you just want to fight) going to another message board.

A) Damn right I'm willing to fight, and not because I "just want to".

B) Major components of the Democratic party are dysfunctional and/or in the control of the military industrial complex; if calling attention to that fact and fighting it causes someone to think I'm " unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party" maybe the problem isn't me. As a matter of fact I am sure it isn't.

C) Please keep your definitions of "better off" to yourself.

Thank you. Please bear in mind, my argument is not with *you*, but with the STATEMENT!

[defendandprotect]

1225. Inviting others to leave DU because you're unhappy with their cricitisms.....

At some point, if you are that unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party, you are really better off (unless you just want to fight) going to another message board.

isn't really wise . . .

unless you also want to be invited to leave?

[steve2470]

1419. sorry for the hasty post

I sincerely retract the sentence about the leaving DU. I was wrong. I apologize.

[cascadiance]

588. I've actually seen one just yesterday on a separate message board bragging about posting here...

... and "infiltrating lightly" initially after just creating a new userid here. I know who this user is, but I'll let him expose himself later, as I'm sure he will at some point. Everyone deserves a fair shot if they post responsibly. But yeah, I think that also "colors" the dialogue at times too.

[POAS]

663. There are disruptors that do not want DU

to succeed, and they are not all coming from the right.

[defendandprotect]

1219. Presumably, you're saying liberal posters here want DU to fail?

Could you explain that comment a bit further, please --

What evidence do you have of that?

[SidDithers]

1537. Absolutely...

there are "liberal" posters here who want DU to fail. Don't be naive.

Sid

[LostinVA]

1257. Liberal posters want neither Obama nor DU to fail

:eyes:

[bluethruandthru]

1338. Exactly right. It's frustrating to bring up something that the administration has done

that you feel is off the mark..and then get attacked and told that you're not giving Obama any credit for what he's done right! I want the party and Obama to succeed...but I don't think that refusing to tolerate any criticism of Obama's decisions will make that happen. I'm very happy about many, many things Obama has done...and I'm unhappy about a lot of things too. I'm not trying to tear him down...I want him to do better.

[creeksneakers2]

1504. Are you being attacked, or

are you receiving disagreement? I see lots of complaints about not being allowed to express opinions but have never seen it happen.

[Joey Kidd]

1549. I agree.

And swarming people who dare to criticize Obama is making far more damages than any legitimate critic of this administration.Is it done on purpose or out of ignorance ?

[defendandprotect]

1700. We might ask them?

Though their reasoning always seem to be fear-based to me --

I don't get it!

They also seem to pull a blanket of "this is a private website" over the issue, as well --

Evidently they think PRIVATE means "no criticism allowed"--?

The think about free speech is that it protects the sayer, not the listener!

[LiberalFighter]

797. The difficult part is being able to determine the trolls that have managed to stay.

It would be nice if we could individually tag them so it would be easier to track their history. So if I thought one might be a troll I could click and it would be a reminder at a later time if I run across that poster again.

[tanyev]

1000. You don't have to use the buddy list for buddies.

Just sayin....;)

[LiberalFighter]

1027. I will check that possibility out. Will then have to remember they aren't buddies.

[Diane R]

817. I agree with babylonsister. I think there's been an infliltration.

I think some people posed as Democrats, and made more than a few posts to prove it, to be in a position to help bring DU down. Can't prove it of course, but the tone changed drastically, and many posts seem like they could come from FR.

[butterfly77]

960. Exactly..

I often wondered which of the CONS who we often see on teevee are posting and helping to divide even more..

They have been onboard DU full force since before the election and all during the lead up to inauguration.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

1243. I guarantee you that some of those most vocal in their critiques will implode and reveal.

It's happened before and it'll happen again.

[FreeState]

980. The reasons I have not give this time

There are several:

1) Im poor.
2) Im unhappy with how I have been treated by some of the Admins - which has nothing to do with how the site is moderated (Skinner if you want more info on that feel free to msg me).

I think a robust dialogue from all sides of the democratic party is important - even if it gets messy.

[JuniperLea]

1015. Yep...

The smart Pubbies are the hardest to deal with... any one of us can take on a TeaBagger... they don't last long here, thankfully.

[readmoreoften]

1050. Let me guess which "side" you think they're on. I agree with you, I just think they're on

the other side.

[LostinVA]

1259. +1

[DCBob]

1106. no doubt there are rethug trolls.. not many but enough to cause trouble..

not sure how to deal with them but its a problem.

[shireen]

1380. yup! the serial unrec'ers, for starters

and when i referred to them in a post using the "t" word (the one you used in your post), my post were deleted. Apparently, it's against DU rules to call someone by the "t" word. Even if it's true. That's what i was told by admin when i asked why my post was deleted. When i asked if there was an appropriate DU-sanctioned term for unrec'ers, I got a one-word response: "people".

Get rid of the "t"s -- the serial unrec'ers. Or get rid of the unrec feature. It will help decrease the animosity on DU.

[Violet_Crumble]

1520. When I read yr post I wished we had the ability to unrec posts...

Not sure why that urge hit me when it did, but there ya go. ;)

[CLANG]

1640. Correct, I can pick them out pretty well

Some are so obvious, but they never seem to be TS'd. I only have two beefs with DU:

1) The unrec feature which is only benefiting trolls and malcontents
2) The discussion of the event that changed the course of world history being relegated instantly to a small invisible sub-forum that can never make the greatest page. If I could ask Skinner one question directly it would be about the treatment of that topic.

Other than those 2 things, I love DU, and I'll always contribute when I can.

[Skinner]

17. To be clear, I do not believe that everyone on DU falls neatly into two groups.

I think there are lots of DUers who are capable of getting along just fine with each other, regardless of how they feel about the President and Democrats.

But the fact remains that many of us find ourselves on opposite sides of a new divide. And that is a huge change for this community.

[geek tragedy]

35. This place was even worse during the 2008 primaries, IIRC.

Ugly, ugly, ugly stuff between Obama and Clinton people.

Maybe the difference is that there was an inevitable closure to all that. The winning side obviously stayed, and the losing side either fell in line like loyal Democrats or hit the bricks.

[Skinner]

43. I think there are two differences:

1) As you said, we knew there was an end to the primaries.

2) We still had John McCain (and Bush) to unite us.

[geek tragedy]

102. Well, we very well may have Speaker Boehner to unite us in 2011.

The ironic thing is that I'd be a lot more inclined to offer criticism of the current administration if I understood myself to be amongst fellow travelers, i.e. people who want it to succeed but think it is making mistakes.

But, I deliberately refrain from doing so because I don't want to feed the dynamic/strength of those trying to tear the administration down, those who view themselves "at war" with the Obama admin (their word choice, I shit you not).

Maybe I'm unique. But probably not.

[nightrain]

432. and some may need "speaker Boehner" to learn how to interact more effectively.

Having been called a freeper and a rethug many times by BOGers last summer when the health insurance debates were hot and heavy, I can tell DU posters and readers that debating skills of some/many are sorely lacking. As a Dem, I am not inclined to reach out to those who make ad hominem atttacks because their debating skills are weak.

[unapatriciated]

1026. I agree with you.

I have been called many things during the HCR debates and questioned on whether or not I was really a dem. Told that I just didn't understand and was either naive or stupid. I have been involved in HCR since 1991 and saw the problems in this bill. When I tried to explain those problems that's when the name calling would begin. I am neither naive nor stupid when it comes to the Insurance Industry and HCR.

[OhioBlue]

885. You're not unique at all.

I'm the same way. Sometimes I feel defensive before I even open DU.

[chimpymustgo]

257. I truly wish this could be more about ISSUES than people. We used to stand for a set of core values

as Democrats and progressives. It's heartbreaking to see them abandoned.

[MissDeeds]

825. I so agree

The core set of values that used to define us now seems to divide us. Some want to hold strongly to them, others are comfortable with a more amorphous interpretation. Now we are divided into camps of conservadem, leftist, neo-liberal, centrists and so forth. The party is splitting, and DU is reflecting that split.

[niceypoo]

999. People who abandon their core values never had them to begin with

Core convictions dont change with the prevailing wind

[readmoreoften]

1052. I can get behind that.

[hlthe2b]

431. Fear (disbelief) at Sarah Palin still unites us...

;) but I fear that the dissent on DU may speak to what befalls us in November and that is something to fear.

As for DU, a lot of that is growing pains, I think.... Plus the economy. The cycles of dissent are disturbing, but we do still seem to be able to move past them...

I know that I still appreciate DU--as much as I did on Inauguration Day, 2001, when it literally was a sanity saver.

[JJ]

1153. At least we still have FOX

There may be hope yet.

[yurbud]

1638. the difficulty with the ''big tent'' approach: is the Democratic Party just a label

or a set of ideas?

Some people who get elected as Democrats fight for few of the ideas their Democratic constituents want them to.

When there is a difference between the pols and the people, we should be allowed to state that without being locked for being ''divisive.''

[yurbud]

1639. the difficulty with the ''big tent'' approach: is the Democratic Party just a label

or a set of ideas?

Some people who get elected as Democrats fight for few of the ideas their Democratic constituents want them to.

When there is a difference between the pols and the people, we should be allowed to state that without being locked for being ''divisive.''

[Stardust]

1390. Or maybe some on the losing side hang around stinking up DU. Bitter, negative losers.

[Skidmore]

478. Skinner, what is that divide?

I get very confused by mixed messages I'm getting from some. There is nothing that I disagree with which is put forth as "liberal" and "progressive" policy. I just am gobsmacked when pointing to the realities of what one is able to do to move policy forward, you get flamed and have much derision heaped on you. This is the divide as I see it. Having worked in policy development, there is a reality that you run up against which many people do not understand. It is the point at which your best intentions and highest hope run smack into reality. Personally, I have given up on trying to initiate constructive dialogue looking for common ground and I have attempted it several times only to watch the threads sink into flamefests. I abandoned them when this happened. Didn't feel good about doing so but getting nowhere is not worth the effort.

I fall in the camp of those who will not abandon the effort that got us this far because doing so will set us back even further. Reality is that the past 30 years saw much effort put into training a generation of "conservatives"/radicals. There is much to roll back and not everyone is on the page we are on. There will be no left wing savior arise magically from the mists if we abandon the hard work of pushing forward and it cannot be done all at once. We do what we can and keep the coals burning for another day.

I may be wrong but I think that just a little effort to show some common courtesy and respect for ideas not your own would go a long way toward finding common purpose. Very few issues out there are dichotomous. We do have a few, I agree. However, we live in a nation filled with many viewpoints. If we don't learn to live together on these forums, what can we hope for the nation?

[pnwmom]

928. +100. n/t

[SlipperySlope]

1393. Some of it could just be burn out.

Skinner, thanks for the heartfelt post. I'll try to be very brief.

It would be foolish to disagree with you on your main point. The community *is* divided. The party *is* divided. But I don't think that is the only reason you may be falling short on fundraising.

Many of us are just burnt out right now. We suffered through Bush. We fought the good fight for Obama. We felt that we would be rewarded for our effort. But it sometimes feels like it was all for nothing. Meanwhile, the system wants the same level of effort from us. But I, for one, just can't muster the passion right now.

I'll say this; despite whatever fracture the community is suffering through, DU remains one of the best places to hang out on the internet.

[Ichingcarpenter]

30. I'm basically a 3 on your list but you should add a financially category

I was foreclosed on and no longer have a credit card and I know
others that are really struggling too on DU who used to be secure
and able to contribute and are not now with counting pennies.

I think Skinner our lord and master (I mean that in a good way)
should just extend the pledge drive

[JustAnotherGen]

86. One more group to add

5. Those of us that when push come to shove - will always go into a voting booth and pull a D - Lever. These folks (myself included) are happy about some things, mad about others but know that even the most Conservative Democratic is better than ANY Conservative, Neo-Con, Libertarian, Christian Theocrat, etc. etc.

We may not get into any of the dog fights at DU. We probably sit on our hands more often than not. But we are always open to reading other peoples' pov's because it enhances our ability to debate people In Real Life who do not fall in ANY of those four groups - read - something to the right of Ben Nelson. We are active in political campaigns at the local level, and give money nationally to candidates. We are the put your money and time where your liberal/progressive thoughts are.


Key Point - I've been registered here for a few years and have less thank 2K posts. But I love to read. If I've not given yet (and intend to do so tomorrow when doing my bills) it's because . . . . I'm learning at DU about candidates outside of NJ that need help - and I've sent them $500 this week. From MN, to SC, to CA, to TX . . .

[susanwy]

1004. Ditto

You summed up my presence on DU rather nicely!

[Lost-in-FL]

1735. Here here!!

I am here to check what is important in politics on a day to day bases. The reason I don't post much is because really, i don't have the temperament to get into fights with anyone. I have already enough to deal with both at work and also being too busy with school.

I can see why people would be dissatisfied with DU lately. The arguments can get too intense sometimes and some people have no restraints when it comes to being plain nasty. It might be perhaps an indication that they care too much about the issues but seriously, who needs all that. On the other hand, there are very few people here that even when an argument is not very 'progressive' in a way, they take the time to try to get to an understanding of the issue in a way that everyone benefits from the discussion. That is now rare. The DU of a few election cycles ago was a lot of fun.

I too donate to candidates DIRECTLY that exhibit true progresive values. I am very proud of my congressman (Grayson) and tend to donate to those showing similar philosophy. There are not very many unfortunately.

BTW... I won't vote for Meeks or Greene for the Senate FL Primary. My vote will go to Ferre. So... time to run outta here folks... :yoiks:

[hfojvt]

249. I don't find that a satisfactory taxonomy

At least I don't consider myself to fall into any of those groups, except maybe #4, and I am not sure very many fall into #1 or #2 although that may be how the two groups characterize each other as either blind partisans or rabid attack dogs.

I think there is a huge current of agreement between group #1 and #2, that both want to move the country "to the left", but the 2nd group is more disappointed in Obama who has seemingly been fighting against the left, as a DLCer, instead of fighting for the left or fighting alongside the left. I understand their frustration, even though I often fight with them on DU.

My concern is about their tactics. Going back to #4, I would like to see them/us promote our issues more than we attack people like Obama or even teabaggers for opposing our issues. If we had threads here like "Obama should support X" or "Obama should oppose Y" which then explained the virtues of X or the foibles of Y, then those would be useful threads. Instead we seem to get threads more like "Obama is a horrible President for not supporting X" or "Obama is a corporate tool for not opposing Y" and then the thrice-daily "laundry list of disgust" that has been so common here. It goes like "I had HAD IT with Obama, first he didn't fight for X, then he didn't fight against Y, and then he said Z, ..., and now he is doing (or not doing) ABC, so I fart in his general direction and it is going to be all his fault when Democrats lose in 2010".

I just don't see how it moves the country to the left by having a site where people go to complain and read about how bad the Democratic Party is and how foolish it is to ever support them. Especially this close to an election. If Democrats lose in 2010, the media will promote the message that "the voters have rejected Obama and the Democrats for being too liberal".

[geek tragedy]

300. I see your point, but if their tactics are to trash the guy

at every occasion, they really can't be said to share a partisan, political agenda with the 80-90% of Democrats who support the President.

[Generic Other]

1571. Criticizing anything that happens in the US is taken as trashing Obama

Therein lies the problem. I have been posting all summer about the situation in the Gulf. People accuse me and the others who post of WANTING the disaster to be worse than it is to advance some Obama-hating agenda. That is how ridiculous it has become!

Same thing happened to those critical of the healthcare outcome. Or the progress of the war. Or the disregard for teachers and unions. These issues have become flashpoints for many. The issues are separate from the personalities. Yet anyone who offers any critique of policy decisions is trashed here at DU.

I remember the day when reading a thread at DU meant becoming informed. People posting multiple links to articles and research. Others following up on every thread. Massive amounts of information to mull over and discuss. Rarely just jumping in simply to be snarky (Nader threads perhaps being the one exception).

No one simply unreccing threads for the hell of it and then posting to brag about it like it was some great addition to the discourse. I have been on DU awhile. I used to post daily. I rarely do anymore. I still read threads though. I see the difference. It is not all related to not having Bush to kick around anymore. There is a new viciousness here that makes me feel unwelcome. No longer part of a tight community as I once felt.

In fact, I feel marginalized and unwanted. And to the person/s who plans to post after this to point me the way to the door, don't bother. I probably was here way before you and will maybe be here way after you are a distant memory.

And I will not shut up and go quietly into that good night.

[Iggo]

290. You left out a group.

People who think everyone falls neatly into one of those groups.

:P

[geek tragedy]

303. There are two kinds of spurs in this world, my friend. nt

[Iggo]

LOL, exactly.

:rofl:

[Radical Activist]

668. And the push to label people into camps is part of the problem.

[proverbialwisdom]

381. I appreciate DU exactly as it is currently configured and

I'm with group #4. I read here everyday.

Thanks for the reminder to contribute.

[JDPriestly]

623. A lot of times people feel "attacked" when they read or hear

an argument that challenges them to change their mind. We usually don't like it when our dearly held ideas are shown to be false.

If someone attacks another DUer ad hominem, that attack should just be ignored.

If more people on DU got into the habit of acknowledging to critics when we are wrong and the critics are right, we would all learn a lot more. There would be fewer people complaining about hurt feelings.

I find that more than half the time when someone thinks they disagree with me, they don't. Very often, the problem is that I just haven't said what I was trying to say very clearly.

When we feel hurt, we need to take responsibility for our own conduct that causes us to feel hurt. We are never faultless.

[YOY]

1034. What a special little place you have in there!

n.t.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

1186. It's the incessant, non-stop nastiness of group 2 that is killing this place.

This site has always had in its rules to "be generally supportive of democrats". What I see around here is critical OP's outnumbering supportive ones, probably on the order of 3:2, maybe 2:1. Most of these threads either start or degenerate into Dems/Obama = Scoundrels. That's not generally supportive.

Mix in the PUMAs and freeper trolls with the crusaders and you have nice toxic soup.

[Go2Peace]

1451. It's a DISCUSSION board

And what exactly is everyone going to discuss? I know that some would like to talk about Republicans all day long, but since almost all agree about Republicans it's really not something that people are going to discuss and debate.

I will say this for the 372 time. The primary problem is not debates. People tend to want to bitch and moan when something they feel strongly about happens. That is just humanity. It can't be stopped. And this discussion is going to continue. I don't think we are at the apex.

[laughingliberal]

1381. I think your analysis is spot on. I'm a something of a 3 and a whole bunch of 4.

I was a member way back when. Didn't post much but read here all the time and felt a real connection. Huge work loads (I had a job way back) and a new marriage began to take up more of my time and I drifted away. Recent years have been taken up with matters of survival as our lives crashed with the economy and my husband battled cancer.

Last July, I came back here still joyful over Obama's election even though our life was still disastrous. I wanted to be here with a community I once felt close to as we began the HCR debate which had been one of the causes of my life. I fully expected we would see a major victory in this area and wanted to be here with people who would share my joy at this while we laughed in the faces of Republican obstructionists. Unable to remember my old screen name or password, I chose the username, "laughingliberal," believing most of my time here would be spent laughing at the anguish of the right wing as we kicked serious butt and put this country back in the hands of the people.

I became disillusioned as I watched the administration and the Senate move to the right and negotiate away most of the decent progressive ideas over HCR and other issues. I remember being disappointed over the stimulus package earlier but realized at that time we did not have 60 votes in the Senate. I knew I was not happy with a lot of President Obama's appointments but I was just naive enough to still be buying into that 'team of rivals' message. Of course, I was still naive enough to believe Clinton moved to the right only because he had to in order to get things accomplished after we lost the House and Senate. (You must understand, my work weeks as an RN in those days was typically 60+ hours so I wasn't able to dig very deep). I was shocked that we seemed to be in no better shape after Al Franken's win gave us our 60th vote in the Senate. I was appalled to watch the administration's efforts at party discipline all going in the direction of beating on the progressives to compromise and not in the direction of pushing the Blue Dogs to compromise.

In short, I find I am often fighting almost as much to achieve the goals I have had for our country now as I was under *. I actively look for issues on which to support the President because I really would like to support him and I still like him, personally, very much. This is painful. On the big ticket items, I have been very disappointed not to see more fight for the ideals I hold dear from a President of my party. Too often, I've seen him actively oppose policies based on those ideals.

The experience at DU, this time, has not been what I thought it would be. I find some of the policies I see people advocate for here shocking. I never thought I would be blasted on a Democratic website for opposing policies of Reagan or the Heritage foundation or the CATO institute. But I have been. I have been shocked and saddened to find an amazing lack of compassion for the poor and the workers. I am shocked to find a Democratic web site with many posters able to disparage the rights of our LGBT brothers and sisters and women. I am an old style liberal who grew up the daughter of civil rights activists and my life and the lives of my entire family were on the line from the time I was 12. I know the history of the labor wars and how many died for the rights of workers in this country. I watch many in the Democratic party bargain away gains for which people died for political expediency and I watch people here defend it endlessly and cheer them on. I watch the party I considered my home for my entire life and realize, with some notable exceptions, it no longer seems to stand for the ideals I hold dear. I find myself wondering what is this place where I see bashing of the poor, women, the sick, the disabled, those who have fallen on hard times, union workers, teachers, LGBT persons, senior citizens, baby boomers, and on and on.

I am not of group #2 but I find it does not matter. I am accused of being no matter how much I post on policy and why I do or do not support a certain policy. The opposition to what I have to say (and I am someone who studies very seriously and digs out as much information as I can to both determine what I think is going on and support my positions)is mean spirited and insulting. I refrain from the name calling and insults almost always but I am not answered in kind. The snark, the insults, the name calling, the passive aggressive call outs are all taking a toll on me. And for what? For believing in the same principles I have believed in for all these decades, for believing in the same principles I have worked to see in our party platform at party caucuses and conventions my whole life? I read rules that say it is not allowed to call people 'cheerleaders,' or 'apologists,' but find posts calling those of us on the left, 'purists,' 'haters,' 'leftbaggers,' remain, despite alerts, many times. People are able to accuse the poor and hungry and unemployed among us who ask for more work towards jobs and social programs of 'wanting a pony.' It is upside down world to me.

When I was a member years ago, I was a monthly donor. In fact, that continued for some years after I was no longer able to spend time here. I had standing contributions here and several other liberal websites. As our financial life fell apart, I had to drop them. The first donor drive after my return I posted about how sad I was I did not have any money to give. Someone donated in my name and I was humbled and grateful that someone did that for me. Once you become poor in this society, you become invisible to most people. In subsequent donor drives, we had a little work in the shop and I was able to make a meager donations, wishing it could be more. This time I have looked at our how tight our money is and know we are on the last job in the shop and don't know if any more will come in. I thought I could probably scrape another of my embarrassingly meager donations but I had to ask myself if I wanted to ask my family (me, my husband, our little dog) to sacrifice for a place that allows me to be treated so badly for trying to stand up for traditional Democratic values and the downtrodden and that I'm not sure still values my opinion or my ideals. Every day the donor board is up there I think about it. And I remain conflicted.

[sabrina 1]

1467. I am so sorry that you have had these battles, your husband

fighting cancer, loss of income etc. I truly hope he is better but understand why the HC debate was so important to you.

You are one of my favorite posters here and that is an incredibly honest and moving post. I hope many people read it because I think you speak for an awful lot people here.

I notice that many DUers I used to read, to look for, are gone and it makes me sad.

I'm glad you are still here ...

I first came here in 2004 and absolutely loved the spirit, humor and dedication and generosity of the people here. But it has changed, maybe because so many have left and have been replaced by a different kind of democrat.

[laughingliberal]

1551. Thank you, sabrina1

First, regarding my husband's cancer, we did manage to keep up the COBRA premiums until he was through the surgery and recommended treatments. His doctor was of the opinion that his chances for return of disease were very minute. We no longer have insurance and are not able to have his followup screenings but I have every reason to hope that particular concern over his health is resolved.

I have always been so impressed with your posts. Your grasp of the issues and knowledge of the history of many of the problems we face today is impressive. I notice you are always able to state your position clearly and with the facts to back them up. I see you maintain your calm and matter of fact demeanor even under attack from people of opposing viewpoints. You are one of my favorite posters here, also, and, I think, a true asset to this community.

I, too, miss seeing many of our former members who no longer seem to be around but am very glad you still are.

[sabrina 1]

1606. I am so glad that you were able to keep your coverage

and that your husband was treated and hopefully, cured. It is a disgrace though, that he cannot get screenings. What more can be said about the dismal state of our HC system?

Thank you for your kind remarks. It is a difficult period for everyone, I just happen to think that facing facts is the best way to change things while I understand the fears some have that by doing so we might be playing into the hands of Republicans. The differences, in most cases, are mostly to do with strategy. Just my opinion though, I am sure others would disagree :-)

[BootinUp]

1500. This post is worth a read. nt

[myrna minx]

1527. Thank you so much for posting this.

:grouphug:

[Generic Other]

1588. I appreciate your voice and am glad you raise it to remind us

what our core values used to be.

[Spheric]

1714. Excellent post. Explains the problem perfectly.

[PassingFair]

1729. +1000....I'm so glad read your whole post!

I feel exactly as you do.

:applause:

[Hepburn]

12. I gave a little and hope to continue to give more...

...I love the DU and wish I could give more.

THE SCOTTIE <-------My Sticky...bet no one guessed, right?

[catgirl]

14. Thanks Skinner

I would love to see an Elections 2010 discussion group added. It would be friendlier
and hopefully inspiring (and is much needed).

[quinnox]

15. I'm unemployed otherwise I would donate

And I think DU is as great as it ever was, quite frankly. For awhile I thought DU was turning into an Obama sycophants only zone and it was not looking good, even some mods at the time seemed to be going that way in their moderation. But it changed back to the way it was and now its once again a free and open place for discussion about Obama, both pro and con. If it was up to me I wouldn't change a thing.

But if people are upset, then maybe they can have General Discussion - Politics be the place for a mostly pro-Obama slant, and the plain General Discussion forum be the place for the mostly critical of Obama slant. I don't know, maybe it is a bad idea, but its an idea. If this worked the mods would make it so each forum was moderated to be one thing or the other and then people could have a place they feel secure and pleased to be there, for example, the pro-Obama folks would not feel bad about having to see all those negative Obama articles posted in their forum and they could have a positive forum for Obama. And the folks who are not happy with Obama would not have to see the empty cheer leading threads and the posts such as "Look at this weeks Obama family photos!" that we have now.

Anyway, hope you guys get your donations to where you want them and I think its mostly the bad economy that is at fault, not that people are unhappy about DU. (though there probably is a bit of that as well)

[Skinner]

26. We are kicking around the idea of providing top-level "safe haven" forums for committed partisans.

But we are concerned about the possible unintended consequences. I think our biggest concern is that if we create two mutually-exclusive forums for two groups, then we are forcing people to declare a side, endorsing this idea that we are enemies, and encouraging polarization.

But many of us actually are polarized.

[quinnox]

40. Whatever you guys come up with I'm sure will be good

But like I said, I'm not sure if there is such a problem in the first place, or if its as serious a chasm as it might seem. To me, DU seems to be as good as it has been in the past.

[Tsiyu]

47. This came to mind as one solution

During **'s reign of terror, it was very refreshing to come here and know that we didn't have to waste time with right wing talking points. I can see that many would also like to freely discuss ideas, topics, issues without wasting time going over the same arguments again and again and again.


This could be somewhat like the gungeon or 911 forums but on a larger scale.

Not an ideal solution, but those who want to discuss Obama's policy without continual rancor could have a space, and those who want to critique the president without being called names could also have a space.

GD-Pro-Obama

GD-New Solutions


or some such...

[ChiciB1]

48. Being FORCED Into A "Side" Would Make ME Less Likely To Post

because THAT is not what I came to DU for! And I HAVE seen it change, even if some here don't see it that way! I've been here for a while and I can't say I've felt this way before!

JMHO!!

[LostinVA]

60. Bingo

[Skinner]

74. I should have put the word "forcing" in scare quotes.

We certainly would not force anyone to pick a side. But the existence of two safe-haven forums might lead people (who otherwise might not) to pick a side.

[LostinVA]

79. I still think it's an extremely bad idea

And will just reinforced what's bad instead of diffusing it. We already have an instance of that on this board, and it has done anything but help.

[Javaman]

298. I agree, it would limit the debate.

A healthy and open debate moves people to rethink positions, research their various assertions and may give pause to those who have opposing views.

[nashville_brook]

139. i don't understand the point in this -- can you explain what you mean by "lead

people to pick a side."?

[flying rabbit]

819. If you have those forums

make sure you keep an open one for possible discussion of issues. I think most of the problem is the economy.

[LostinVA]

58. That is about the worst idea I have ever heard sugegsted on here

Even worse than the "Nuclear Block" of a few years ago. The BOG redux.

[JVS]

95. Nuclear block was a stroke of genius. I want it back to keep disruptors off my threads!

[LostinVA]

110. It only lasted like three days

Trolls were putting all the gay posters, etc., on their list, so they wouldn't get called on their crap. The trolls at places like FR were actually coordinating it.

[JVS]

129. I used it to put Jpgray on block and then start an appreciation thread for him.

[Stinky The Clown]

81. Serious/no snark

Create a whole second DU. You have the best user interface. Clone it. Apply a catchy name, and let it go. One would be Pro Obama and one would be Pro Left Wing. (Not implying ANYTHING by that grouping).

[tavalon]

263. Twice the work, twice the fun?

While I think it's a great idea, I don't think it's fair to ask these three men to run both.

[bigtree]

552. so we can't be pro-'left wing' and pro-Obama?

That's news to me.

[Stinky The Clown]

564. You're the perfect example of my point. Did you miss the closing of what I said?

"(Not implying ANYTHING by that grouping)."

Ignore the point and go for the attack. How grownup of you.

Why do we have problems here in River City? You can't give it a fucking rest even for a moment. Shame on you.

[bigtree]

583. why do you insist on interpreting my view of what you said an attack?

I thought the qualifier you provided was insufficient for your suggestion. What in the world would be the point in dividing between the two views? I don't like the idea of dividing AT ALL. And, I certainly don't harbor ANY animosity toward you personally; not for your views or your responses. I'm just responding to the notion of the divide you suggest. I'm not for it. How that 'proves your point', I can't even begin to imagine.

[readmoreoften]

1123. Well, you'd have to redefine "left wing" to do both. Considering the administration

has called liberals "retards" and "the professional left" that speaks loads. #2: considering that the administration has not lead on DADT and Obama underscored his support that marriage was man+woman right after Prop 8 was rejected. #3: considering that the administration is union-busting and dismantling public education. #4: considering the administration is expanding "free trade" and not attacking NAFTA (contrary to campaign promises).

Yes, it's hard to support the administration the way you do and then go on and on about how "left" you are.

[bigtree]

1251. depends on the issue

. . . but we all see these issues (and measure the administration) through our own bias. Personally, I'm not anxious to align myself with or identify myself with any group other than Democrats and Americans. I'll leave it to others to construct their little ideological boxes - I'll construct my own, thank you. If pressed, I'd have to admit that most of my views are to the left of the considered political spectrum. Support for this administration and this President is based on the notion of our party as an organizing base to (hopefully) advance our initiatives and ideas into action or law. That's just not going to be the prefect ideological match with our own ambitions as we might like because we are not operating in some political vacuum.

I bring my 'liberalism' to the table and I work to have my ideals accepted by enough of a majority of legislators and the WH to advance them in our political system. That's why I strongly support this Democratic president. It's been a hard slog to get this far and I care enough about the issues I represent to keep pushing, given the elevation in our political system that our election of Barack Obama has allowed us, so far. I don't shed my own values as I support and defend the ground we've captured (the election and terms of our majority and Democratic president), despite the insistence of folks that I abandon support for my political vehicle (our party and our president).

[smiley_glad_hands]

1371. +1

My sentiments exactly.

[nashville_brook]

127. So, you're in favor of elevating the BOG to the premier DU forum?

[MineralMan]

167. I can't see where he said that at all...

In fact, he's just saying that he recognizes two distinct groups here.

[nashville_brook]

189. so, there would be TWO premier, top-level forums: BOG and ?? something else?

[nashville_brook]

190. so, there would be TWO premier, top-level forums: BOG and ?? something else?

[MineralMan]

I don't know, really.

My focus is on GD, and I don't post hardly at all in any other areas, except by accident. I follow DU via the Latest Posts page, so I do get pulled into other forums than GD from time to time, but that's not the norm for me at all.

I've visited the Barack Obama Group, and have posted there maybe twice, but GD is where I live on DU.

Frankly, I don't see much utility in one-sided areas. There's little discussion going on in them, and little controversy. It is the controversy and discussion that make a forum great. When it gets down to personal attacks, that's a different matter, though. Such attacks, whether on another poster or on a Democratic politician, are counter-productive, and destroy discussions.

[Renew Deal]

234. It's a bad idea

for the reasons you stated.

[Patsy Stone]

325. Noooooo.

Bad idea. My .02

[Little Star]

355. Have you given any thought to the fact that Obama will not

be president forever? What will happen if personality over principle is the choice you make?

To me it's a no-brainer, this place is called Democratic Underground and democratic principles should top any individual POL.

I think you need to look with-in and decide who you really are politically. I pray you will stand for democratic principles above all else.

I wish you and this very special board well.

[nightrain]

435. terrible idea. The BOG already exists.

[The Green Manalishi]

495. I find it interesting that the same schisms occurs on FR

True believers, ideology only matters versus the arguments that "Any D is better than any R, look at cloture, SCOTUS, speakership", etc.

Exactly the same arguments on both left and right. There were probably exactly the same percentage of conservatives who *HATED* president Bush (sorry, I find *any* diminution of names childish, hang the bastard, but idiocy of not calling people by their titles and parties by their chosen names is just stupid, IMHO). The arguments of pragmatism, getting and holding power even if it must be done with the aid of 'RINOs' or, in our case 'DINO's being at odds with those who are damn sick of holding their noses and voting and have decided that the party needs a wake up call even if it means losing the White House or congress.

Personally, I think those tensions derive from our two party system. If the only alternative to a DINO is a Republican- then, as much as I want to slap the crap out of someone who defends the President not ending DADT *NOW*, as disgusting as I found Gibb's tirade, and as unpleasant as the reality that much of the administration consists of the same Wall Street crooks and thieves that got us into the current mess, they have a point. The conservatives face the same conundrum, and in many ways are even more divided, fiscal VS social, Christian VS Darwinian, 'REalpolitik' VS Islamophobic.

No answers, just thanks for your hard work. Sonation forthcoming next payday.

[FSogol]

Your "idiocy of not calling people by their titles" theme might be stronger

if you remembered to capitalize the word "President."

;-)

[The Green Manalishi]

1294. DOH!

Thanks!:beer:

[EFerrari]

522. Instead of thinking of it as enemy camps, you could think of it as two ways to

approach a problem, through advocating for this presidency v. through advocating for social justice.

That isn't promoting polarization, really. That's letting people approach and discuss problems in the way that is more comfortable for them.

[truth2power]

678. Yes. Advocating for social justice....

Blind advocacy for this presidency can easily morph into a cult of personality. Then what?

I have many issues here. I don't feel that I'm allowed to voice them, though.

I have asked one question REPEATEDLY...if we ridiculed the Republicans for walking in lock-step with Bush, how is it different if we're expected to support Obama unequivocably. I've never received an answer.

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

[readmoreoften]

1093. +1

I agree. Sometimes I want to advocate for social justice and discuss things with the left DUers without having whatever I say become a referendum on Obama, who I personally don't find very important one way or the other.

[JDPriestly]

649. Many of us are confused in our feelings.

We would like to support our Party and our President, but we see what a mess is being made. How do we change things for the better?

I spoke to an absolute cynic last night who thinks that there is nothing anyone can ever do.

I agree and disagree. Not since the 17th century has the wealthy oligarchy had so much control over the lives of us Americans.

But then, I think about my American ancestors who fought in the War of 1812, who struggled against slavery when it was the norm, who joined the German revolution for democracy in 1848, who came here and fought in the Civil War on the Union side, who joined the Populist movement during the Gilded Age and who, during my lifetime, sided for Civil Rights for all and equality and who now support gay marriage.

We have changed things. We can change things, even when the oligarchy opposes us.

When I look back on my personal activist ancestry, I am not surprised that I sometimes disagree with people on DU, but I am comforted by the fact that in every struggle in the past, my ancestors have been on the side of moral strength, of love and compassion for mankind and for human progress, and I recognize that fighting for those values is my genetic destiny, no matter what.

I'm on DU because even when everyone disagrees with me, I know that my talent and therefore my duty is to make a difference through my thought, my voice, my writing in the struggle for progress.

As long as DU exists, I will be a member, however, limited my ability to contribute may be, and I will play my part.

Skinner, what is the DU budget? Where does the money go?

When my children were small, we really did not have enough to live on. I found that if when I did not have money for the basic necessities, what I needed to do was to keep very strict records of my expenditures and look around because what I really needed or something that would do as well was virtually always there if I just looked hard enough.

[defendandprotect]

697. "Safe haven" ... bury your head in the sand playground?

Just addressing this one specific idea and not the overall problem --

This is a view to escapeism, rather than encouraging people to actually look at

issues and wade thru debate.

Are Democrats so fragile these days that we can no longer debate one another?

Unfortunately, this isn't at all about the election of a Democratic president which

might have brought complacency about "fighting the right wing" --

Rather, it's about a president/administration, itself, which has been from the first

moments moving government further to the right --

and it is THAT which is causing, actually, much needed debate within the DU community.


Unfortunately, everyone has to decide whether they are also going to fight the

infiltration of the Democratic Party by the right wing/corporates/DLC -- or whether

they are going to ignore it because it's "our guy" doing it!

[Mithreal]

1118. +1

[defendandprotect]

1234. Love the way you express your political views--!!

Adorable -- !!

[truth2power]

718. I think the problem has to be fixed systemically. n/t

[readmoreoften]

1088. I'm very supportive of that idea.

I used to be a diehard progressive Democrat (for about 18 years) but the rightward shift of the party--culminating in not only its failure to fight the ongoing Bush Doctrine but its adoption of many aspects of the Bush Doctrine--has resulted in my becoming a leftist independent. There are many wonderful progressives who identify with the Democratic Party and I want to support them and be a part of their lives. There are Democratic politicians that I support--particularly local ones in my Red area. But I have to admit that the Right-Wing faction on DU has pushed me further away from the Democratic Party.

I do believe that there are some of them who really share some progressive values. But I also think that many of them don't. I think that there are many on the Party's right who are now pro-war, who are anti-union, who are anti-immigrant, and who are (although subtle because they know they'll get kicked off) are anti-LGBT. So I don't think that its necessarily true that we all agree on what we want we just see different ways of getting there. I think there is a difference in platform now. I think it was inevitable: the Democrats became a catch-all for a popular front against Bush. United against and united for are very different concepts.

I think the idea of a left DU and a right DU as very interesting and potentially productive. People in the middle could post in both forums as long as they were respectful. Those of us in either forum could organize amongst ourselves. Sometimes when I post things, I'm not talking to the right-wing Democrats. I already know what they think. I want to know what the left-wing Democrats think.

I personally think it would be more productive.

Sorry about not being able to donate. :(

[JJ]

Do you remember how that worked out last time?

The "Underground" forum, by invite only. That was a disaster, IIRC.

on edit:
Maybe I should say the "first" time, haven't been around much.

[Cleita]

1212. You already have that.

It's called GD and GDP. I don't think you need any more polarization. Actually, I would combine both forums into one. It would force a certain civility I hope that isn't present right now if you step into the wrong forum with an opinion not accepted within that forum.

[Go2Peace]

1456. What is a "partisan". Most here are "Partisans"?

The vast majority of us vote exclusivly Democratic? Doesn't that make most of us Partisans? :)

[CBR]

32. "Obama sycophants"... very constructive. nt

[LostinVA]

66. The poster is correct, though

There is a group like that, and it hasn't helped at all. As I said in a thread last week: MANY of us who fought in the primaries are fine with each other now. Some, like Creekdog, have become personal friends of mine. But, there are a small but vocal band who rail at any body who crosses a line they have, including many Obama Primary Warriors, who have let the Primary battles go. It has been rather interesting to see this all happen.

[Skinner]

77. Let's be fair here:

There are "small but vocal bands" on both sides who rail at anyone who crosses a line they have.

[LostinVA]

100. No, i think YOU aren't being fair by admitting this point is legit

The poster was talking about THIS group, no other group. This is what is happening, Skinner, and you just did it yourself. No one will discuss certain issues, just finger point. I am gay and a woman, you bet I won't put up with homophobic or sexist shit, and I never will. EVER. THAT isn't the same thing at all. There are Obama "Fans" on here, and posters who are Right Wingers who attack Obama. I do not consider criticism of Obama from Left posters as "attacks," because they want to make things better. And, those two groups do nothing but attack, they can't post an OP asking, as I did, what's the best approach to "moving on" from 9/11. EVER. And, being dismissive of this truth does upset and anger posters who don't mind tussling and debating, but who are sick of the swarms and personal attacks.

There are two extreme sides, but they are NOT Left and DLC/Moderate, and that's' what the problem is: they are being presented as such. The Left isn't the problem on here, and the Moderates aren't the problem. Even many of the Conservadems aren't. That's why I think the "safe haven" suggestion is not only misguided, but wouldn't help anyway.

[geek tragedy]

123. If you really believe that DEMOCRATIC Underground

has been ruined by the people who are partisan supporters of a Democratic President, you are probably equally part of the problem.

[librechik]

218. no, it's Democratic UNDERGROUND, i.e, for the left wing of the party.

Otherwise, just call it Democrats.com. Wait, there's already one of those.

that was my understanding in the beginning, and I've struggled to be tolerant of some of the non-progressive crap that gets slung around here so pompously. But I'm a DEMOCRAT, when I criticize Obama I'm doing it to make the party better, not to ruin it. And of course my vote goes to the Ds until something more effective comes along.

[geek tragedy]

311. While there's a Democrats.com there are also many

websites that cater to the Green/Nader viewpoint that the Democratic party is the problem, not a potential vehicle for solutions. And yet we have folks here who view the current president as the enemy.
It's a tension that is at some level ultimately unresolveable.

[TZ]

529. Have you read the MISSION statement here.

It says its for people who support DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES not "only the left wing of the democrats are allowed". The bigotry on this site for anyone who isn't left enough is something that reminds me of how the far right behaves with those they consider too moderate.
IMO, this site should be welcoming to ALL democrats..socialists, liberal, progressive, blue dog, centrist etc. To try to limit it to one wing of the party is agaisnt the BIG TENT philosophy of this party.

[SunsetDreams]

558. +1000

[librechik]

747. I'm not disputing what the mission is, that mission is embraced by leftwingers too

I'm taking about the "bigoty" displayed by certain centrists here who don't understand that while we welcome all (big tent) we have a slant to the left, unlike, say Democrats. com. Lately the lefties are getting crowded out by the groups you mention, and while I accept it, it's not, as Skinner says, the "OLD DU"--which was very left of center. I'd like my old DU back, yes, but if I have to accommodate others, so be it. I'm a liberal. I won't complain and ask to have you thrown off for your outlandish ideas, as you would do to us.

[cascadiance]

658. I think that "Democratic Underground" is more difficult now... Perhaps "Progressive Underground"?

The problem with "Democratic Underground" is that it used to work so well earlier when it described both our feelings of a need for more democracy, and a party out of power that was dissenting against a problematic Republican Party in charge that was trying to push it in to the ground. It allowed for a lot of unity there.

Now the name implies:
1) Democratic - as in big D Democratic Party identity (whether they are doing the right thing or no)
2) democratic - as in small d democratic principles that I think most of us want, but some of us don't necessarily apply to the Democratic Party.
3) Underground - implies a group that's working against those in power who are the problem... This kind of now fights with definition 1.

"Progressive Underground" wouldn't confuse item #1 as the operative part of the definition, though it wouldn't necessarily exclude Democrats that have progressive leanings (and what many would call traditional Democratic Party values).

Now by switching that, you are declaring more allegiance to those with progressive values as opposed to those for the Democratic Party. That's also where it gets tricky, as it is easy to see who's speaking for or against the Democratic Party, but what makes one individual speaking more progressively than another? That's trickier to measure. So I'm not completely sold on this name change either.

But I do think some thought here about any changes are made should be thinking about the name of the board, and how it can be changed so that it doesn't have an inherent confused message with the name, but is more of a unifying force to push for change. And perhaps make it more like what Tom Hartmann says isn't a circular firing squad, but a wind of pushing for change behind Obama and other party members' back who we might at times disagree with.

And perhaps the board should entertain more those that want other parties, but need to make sure they can justify those positions from progressive viewpoints, and hopefully not denigrating Democrats without being specific about what issues they feel that these other parties are more progressive/better for us than the Democratic Party entity is.

So this name confusion is one problem. I think two other problems facing DU now are the economy and how it affects all of us financially. As another person that's out of work, I still have routine periodic donations I contribute, small as they may be, but I really can ill afford to donate any more at this time, where if I were working, I'd feel a lot more comfortable to throw in some more to help with a goal like this, especially if I felt some unity towards a purpose that the board was seeking that we all felt unified to accomplish.

I think one other big problem is that this poor economy and people being out of work not only affects people financially, but also affects how they use their time. I think I can speak for myself and many here that simply have to focus more on job hunting and other life essentials now than working on separate activist projects in terms of priority. This is due to:

1) needing to get employment, address other financial issues that need various types of attention, which takes priority over most everything else.
2) not having time to really go deeply in to looking at an issue that needs attention and providing useful help to the DU community and other progressives in helping with it.
3) with the Dems in power, it is really hard to see which areas need deep activist work, that aren't going to have us butt heads against each other. The old ones like Valerie Plame, etc. that gives us unity of purpose and can have us scour the net for pieces of info, aren't clear any more. When you couple that with 2, it makes it really impossible for a lot of investigative work and corresponding rallying of activist groups harder.
4) there are so many other broader issues now, the banksters, the war, gulf oil spill, climate change, the economy, etc. that are all hitting us at once, it is hard to know where to focus our energy on too, even if we didn't have issue 3 of not being necessarily unified on which issues to go after too. By having so many, and so few of us able to do work now on activism, a lot of issues don't get near enough attention.

I think Skinner that you should also look at how both FSTV and LINK-TV are struggling heavily with their fund-raising as well (I hope neither of these two go under either) and I think have some of the similar variables that DU is facing now in terms of fund raising. This is more of a global problem for non-profits and those working "against the machine" now...

I think the board needs to decide whether to emphasize that it is a part of the Democratic Party, and that being progressive is secondary, or that it is a gathering point for progressives, and being a member of the Democratic Party is secondary. To try and heavily emphasize both is pushing us in to conflict. Personally I'd prefer the latter, and think that is the area which is more needed that "official" sites associated with the Democratic Party don't offer, and hoping that is where DU goes to. Hopefully that doesn't put you too much in the "professional left" category that has some in the Democratic Party establishment push us aside more. I really hope that the party at some point embraces more progressives, and would like to think that DU could help at some point achieve that goal as a voice of progressives.

[defendandprotect]

720. When that "partisan" support extends to trying to block criticism of

this administration's move to the right, then it is a problem.

[Sapphocrat]

828. I believe it's been ruined...

...by those who, just a few short years ago, would have been raging against a given policy/stance carried out under/taken by Bush, but who are perfectly OK with same policy/stance because now it's Obama doing it.

I could have articulated that more eloquently, but I'm sure you know what I mean. And I'm sure you'll disagree with it, but what the hell -- it has to be said.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

1314. That's my take on it.

They're a relatively small group, quite vocal and probably big $$$$ donors.

[Go2Peace]

1464. Absolutely.

[OhioBlue]

1383. Well, your truth is your perception I guess.

My perception is quite the opposite. I think DU is being ruined by posters that do nothing but attack the President. Especially when it is knee-jerk, petty stuff. The serious discussion would be welcome... but a lot of posts contain things that are not criticism, but vitriol and talking points.

[BootinUp]

1587. not exactly

its not petty stuff. Its difficult/slow to do stuff. And we want someone to blame for it.

[Joey Kidd]

1584. +1 n/t

[Lil Missy]

1737. Bingo

[rusty fender]

181. Totally agree--k&r!

I don't post much, but I like to read as many posts that I have time for, which is not much. I like DU just as it is: a free-for-all of ideas.

[Jackpine Radical]

338. I think of DU as just one big, incredibly dysfunctional family.

As Democrats, we naturally have immense problems handling the electoral successes of '06 and '08. I have been critical of Obama, and maybe sometimes too critical. I have also applauded what I consider to be his positive actions. I very much value the people around here who differ with me. I know that they essentially want the same things I want, namely, for the world to be a better place and for everyone to have adequate access to the necessities of life and the opportunity to develop and flourish. But we have immense arguments about how to get there. I submit that those arguments are valuable in themselves. I don't mind reading the comments of people who don't see things exactly as I do. Sometimes I change my opinion as a result of exposure to different viewpoints--and sometimes I don't. But in either case I believe my notions are improved, made more complex and sophisticated, and more reality-connected as a result of interactions with those who disagree with me.

All that said, I don't think it is useful or productive for our disagreements to get low and personal. Nobody here is stupid. (Well, maybe a few passing trolls excepted.) Nobody is mean-spirited. Nobody wants to see suffering. I hope that out of our various conflicts we can help to advance the great national debate, and can all grow as people. This process is itself often painful, but I think very valuable nevertheless. More comity and civility would be nice, but I think DU is serving its root functions quite well. I vote for no changes. And I do think that the economic hard times are the major cause of the fundraising problems.

[nightrain]

455. I see it similarly. I appreciate the ignore feature more than ever before!

I didn't want to use it before, but when the unfounded personal attacks reached a certain level, those folks' posts lost value for me.

[Go2Peace]

1465. True, it shouldn't be a surprise since our whole country is basically dysfunctional right now ;)

Part of what brought us here was that as a society we *didn't* have the debates we should have. So we *need* to have them.
We are in the midst of a national crisis. In a Democracy it would be normal to have strong debates and feelings.

[SunsetDreams]

562. It's only legit if you admit it works BOTH ways.

[LostinVA]

861. Which shows you didn't read my post at all

Because there IS NO "BOTH SIDES."

[SunsetDreams]

950. Your first post

was only talking about one side. You failed to mention that there is another side, or sides.
I read plenty, which is why you chose to jump on Skinner for saying that he sees it with both sides.

[LostinVA]

1268. Again, you are willfully misconstruing what I wrote and trying some strawmen in

All while badgering me and others in this thread. Quelle surprise.

Not.

[SunsetDreams]

1709. strawmen strawmen

Now, I guess if you really agreed with Skinner, then there was no need for what you posted to him.
"No YOU fail to admit this point is legit" when all he did was point out that it happens on both sides after you tried to only talk about one side.
There is no misconstrue about anything. Badgering you? Not hardly. You replied, I replied, that's what happens on a message board.

[CBR]

78. There are groups of individuals on this board

who band together on a variety of issues and bash anyone who disagrees. There are individuals who post on another site who band together to swarm threads and individual posters. There are alot of cliques on here but to single one out as the potential problem is the basis of the problem we are having -- everyone is convinced that they are the right and nobody else can possibly be. Personally, I have similar feelings, there is a group of posters who just cannot bring themselves to say anything positive about the President and who think they carry the banner of what "true liberalism" is.

[LostinVA]

105. The psoter was discussing this one group, so I discussed this one group

I am not a member of that board, and that is far from a liberal board. There is also a group that coordinates swarms against the "other groups."

And, you know what? If you are against GLBT rights or women's rights, or are for bigotry based on race or religion, you deserve to get called on it. that isn't bashing.

[CBR]

126. Now that you mention it. There is plenty of racism coming in the

form of dismissing concerns about race as "class issues" but it goes on constantly. We could not even agree on a liberal board that white privilege exists. IT seems like minorities are woefully underrepresented on this board and, seeing that they make up a large portion of the base, it is very disconcerting. It is because the issues of racial minorities are not taken seriously and dismissed under the auspices of classism IMO.

[boston bean]

213. I see your not a fan of Shirley Sherrod.

It's not racist to recognize class as a real problem.

[CBR]

411. Class is a problem but people on here ignore race

in favor of class. That is the problem. In threads about racism, people will say stupid shit like "divide and conquer" or we must unite on class. Well, I will tell you what, when working and middle class white people get off their racist stick, then come talk to me. It is not minorities who need to capitulate and bring a class together, it is whites.

[bobbolink]

546. .

:eyes:

I wanted to :rofl:, but I will settle for :eyes:

[CBR]

620. Thanks. It is important to know who think racism is not a problem on here.

It is quite clear.

[bobbolink]

634. You are very welcome, because I also like knowing who doesn't give a rip about poverty.

[CBR]

820. Try again. I was born to a 15 year old mother in rural WV.

Nice talking to you and your one-sided view of the world where only class matters.

[bobbolink]

835. And I very much appreciate your concentration on YOU and demanding that others do the same.

This is exactly why THEY are winning... because so many of you are cooperating with the divide-and-conquer strategery.

Congratulations. Job well done.

[superduperfarleft]

863. Wow, project much?

You of all people are actually berating someone for seemingly concentrating on their own situation at the expense of other issues?

[Violet_Crumble]

1389. +10000 n/t

[Go2Peace]

1468. You may not know it

I don't know if bobolink is still, but for years she was homeless and posting here from a library. So poverty tends to be on her mind.

[superduperfarleft]

1534. Holy shit, she's HOMELESS?

I had no idea!

:sarcasm:

[Hekate]

1665. It has been a secret known to few

(God forgive me for laughing out loud)

[SidDithers]

1574. Great observation...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[CBR]

1132. You insulting someone for talking about themselves is

laughable. That is all you do on here. Your response to every issue goes back to your personal experience. Seeing that I grew up as a rural working class white person and I am saying minority voices are left out, I think maybe it is not me who has an issue focusing constantly on my personal situation.

[bobbolink]

1166. Thank you for your fine personal attack. Do us both a favor and put me on ignore.

I would appreciate that very much.

So much, in fact, that I will lead the way.

Welcome to my ignore list. I hope it makes you feel sooooo much better.

[awoke_in_2003]

1326. you are wrong...

racisms is not ignored here. When it is identified it is smacked down good. Class, on the other hand, is not. Downthread you accused bb of thinking only class matters in this country- bb is right. The poor are the invisible in this country- they are not even acknowledged by politicians- they are too worried about getting the middle class vote so they can get in office and start raking in the money from the ruling class. This explains why we have one party with two different names.

[JonLP24]

1070. I see this both ways

While there are posters who don't agree with anythiing the President does, there are others that will defend any issue, no matter how bad it is.

Issues are what should be important. If it is a good thing say so, if it is a bad thing say so.

[Sheepshank]

215. So, Obama supporters are sychophants?

name calling is constructive? Denigrating those with a difference of opinions is constructive? Worried about the political position of others that they are not a collective registry of a personal opinion. Wow, clever *not*. Post #15 was sort of lost on me after that one liner.

[Jakes Progress]

543. Please stop that.

There are a number of Obama supporters. And there are a number of Obama sychophants. It is easy to tell the difference. The sychophant never - never ever - finds any thing that the administration does is wrong or even less than the perfect thing to do. They approve of anything done if Obama does it. They would not approve of it if a republican did it and would question it's wisdom if some other Democrat did it. Plus they brook no discussion that might question an administrative action.

I have no problem with that. I have my knee-jerk issues - racism, sexism, glbt attacks. Their knee jerk issue is not an issue, it is the president.

If you can disagree with the president on some issues, then you aren't a sychophant. But there is no perfect person and to never find fault is a conscious decision to ignore reality.

Personally, I believe some of the most devout defenders are not who they say they are. If I wanted to foment discord among republicans on a site, I wouldn't be able to do that by attacking mccain or palin. But I could alienate and piss off whole groups of serious people (yeah like republicans are serious about anything other than cutting taxes) by attacking people on the site as not being good enough or pure enough. I would tell them that palin and gingrich hate them and want them to go away if they don't like it. I don't have time to do that kind of stuff, but I think it would be effective.

[Sheepshank]

743. There is no way to tell...so why bring up the label?

Disagreeing with Obama will never necessarily mean those people will speak up. To be called a sychopant because a person hasn't submitted a negative post, is simply wrong, abusive and little more that playground bullying. So if anyone should stop it's those that insist on name calling when they have limited information on which to base erronous judgements.

As mentioned on this thread, there are plenty here that are not in 100% agreement with Obama's processes etc. But to mention anything along those lines here at this time seems to do nothing less that provide fuel for a negative feeding frenzy. I personally would rather not fuel that extreme toxicity.

[Jakes Progress]

771. So stop bringing it up.

If you must comment on something then you have to know that it will keep bumping that something up. You have your say. Someone has theirs. You again. Them again. If you don't think something should be discussed, then just let it sink. But don't make a comment about a post and tsk tsk when others comment on yours.

[Sheepshank]

803. you're telling me to stop, to shut up?

interesting, and a true example of what I've been talking about

[Jakes Progress]

953. Interesting. You just did it again.

Are you trying to prove Skinner's premise that DU is busted. You knew all along that the first post you responded to didn't say that all Obama supporters were sycophants. But you implied it did and suggested that he shouldn't post that - that he should in effect shut up.

And here you accuse me of telling you to shut up when you know that wasn't what I did. That is a very dishonest way of discussing. Perhaps Skinner is right about the low level of discourse to which DU has sunk.

And your posts are indeed a perfect example. To quote Joseph Welch: "You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency"

[Sheepshank]

1089. oh, telling me to stop talking is so very different than shut up?

you are being disingenious and the level of discourse plummeted the moment you tried to dissuade me (or anyone) from making a statement that you personlly didn't like. If you wanted a discussion, perhaps the thing to do would have been to discuss rather than attempt to shut down with a rather arrogant assumption that your words carried any weight with me.

[Jakes Progress]

1316. You are shameless.

Show me where I told you to shut up. If you truly believe that was what I wrote, then you are comprehension impaired.

I didn't think you are really that obtuse, but you do seem capable of saying anything and making things up rather than admitting error.

So go ahead and quote me telling you to shut up. I never tried to shut you up. You whined that you didn't like people saying something (implying that they should shut up) and I said if you don't like the subject being brought up the best way to get it off the board was to let it sink. Then you went into drama mode, screaming about being told to shut up.

Dense or dishonest. I honestly can't guess which now. I had given you credit for thinking but not honor, but now I don't know.

[LostinVA]

865. Of course you can tell -- there's no way NOT to tell

[Sheepshank]

1092. bull

[LostinVA]

1271. THERE IS NO WAY NOT TO TELL

They do stick out like sore thumbs.

[niceypoo]

1031. Actually, they stick out like sore thumbs

Particularly in the GDP forum. Some people are followers, just gotta accept that fact and move on.

[Sheepshank]

1125. not true

the claim that there are sychophants here, is made merely because a poster may not have posted a word of dissention regarding Obama. The premis is false. No one can tell if someone is a sychopant or not because of their posting history. No one.

There are things I don't agree with regarding Obama's policy process and choices....I will never delineate them on this bb. I am not the only one who refrains from such posts. I presume to get involved in other ways to affectuate or at least try to affectuate change.

So how do you know who all those presumed sychophants are? Of course you can't "know".

[LostinVA]

1277. Totally true

Saying there aren't is being willfully ignorant or terribly naive. Although I will say some may be ConservativeCave or FR disruptors, trying to make Obama supporters look bad.

[Go2Peace]

1470. "because a person hasn't submitted a negative post"

No, they don't "simply" "not post negative". They post and then determinedly argue any point and purpously distort and misrepresent anyone who makes a reply that does not agree 100%. There is a difference.

[LostinVA]

864. Not one poster on here has EVER said that -- EVER

[SunsetDreams]

YOU responded "The poster is correct though"

"Obama sycophants"... very constructive

You responded to the person, who replied to the post that said "Obama sycophants"
It's still there. Did you mean to reply to something else?

"Not one poster has ever said that here EVER"

[LostinVA]

No one has EVER said Obama supporters are sycophants, ever

Some Obama "supporters" aren't supporters, but sycophants, just like any other politician. I Haven't said anything un constructive, but you sure are trying to make it appear I did.

And, I didn't realize you were in charge of whom I may or may not respond to. Mea culpa.

[SunsetDreams]

Again you say it, YOU agreed with post 15 which does in fact say that

and you still say "No one has EVER said Obama supporters are sycophants, ever"

Are you kidding me? "that poster is correct though" Did you just read right over the part where that poster said that?

[LostinVA]

1275. No one has ever said that, including that poster

EVER.

You can't find one post that ahs ever said that, unless it was by some five-post troll whom was TSed ASAP.

[SunsetDreams]

1570. ahh but it does say that

:rofl:

[BootinUp]

1582. kinda concerning no?

:rofl:

[yurbud]

1629. if they are honest about the nature of deals made, who was served, who was pressured and who

was stroked, I don't have a problem with it.

When someone says he got the best deal possible when he didn't really even try for the best deal, that's something else.

[Joe Fields]

401. I, for one don't like talking into an echo chamber.

I think that is a moderately bad idea.

[True_Blue]

1578. I am too but .....

I decided to donate $5 anyway At this point, $5 isn't going to break me much more than I am already.

[jeanpalmer]

1744. Excellent suggestion

Separate forums for each viewpoint. But a forum also for those who are willing to mix it up. Just redesignate a couple of the forums.

[nc4bo]

18. I can't give more until after the drive is over....

I borrowed a few $$ to participate in this one.

The economy is soooooooooo bad, we're managing to keep our heads over the waterline as it is but I really do love DU even with its divisions.

I can manage to do a bit more but I need more time. :(

[knitter4democracy]

138. Same here.

I don't start getting paid again for at least another three weeks. :(

[BeFree]

19. Thanks, Skinner

We all knew bush was bad, and have a distrust of government because of his administration. That distrust carries over into the Obama administration.

Distrust shows critical thinking, and DU, if nothing else is a place to have discussions about critical thoughts concerning the government's activities.

I love all that. It has enriched me beyond all expectations.

What does bug me is that, for some unknown reason to me, some of the best critics have been forcibly removed from our discussions.

Kinda like judge, jury and executioner in one feel swoop.

It is a problem you recognize. Maybe a solution should be we get to vote? To be sort of a jury of peers, when someone is to be excommunicated?

Ah, don't mind me, I'm just a 'twoofer'.

[kentuck]

20. DU should be a political Party.

We should make endorsements to those liberals that espouse our values. We would not be a big tent Party. We would be progressives.

[AsahinaKimi]

21. Guess I was lucky to

be able to help out..with some donations. I love the sticky board, just as I loved the Valentines..I Hope it all helps. I hope to be here for a long time!

[Fumesucker]

22. I think it has at least as much to do with the economy..

I've been a donor to DU for quite a while, it's still one of the best places I've found on the web to discuss politics and current events with people who are for the most part intelligent, informed and thoughtful.

But a lot us are running on empty, I've been doing it for so long that it's become the new normal for me, in fact my screen name has to do with the fact that I'm in financially desperate straits, I'm sucking financial fumes.

I still like coming here and I for one actually enjoy seeing and arguing with different points of view, I'm not interested in being part of a total echo chamber, I know what I think and don't need constant reinforcement like so many who listen to right wing talk radio. I'm also willing to be persuaded to change my opinion, indeed I have changed my opinions, maybe not often but it has happened.

Don't blame yourself or what you are doing Skinner, there are still a lot of us out here who appreciate the resource that is DU.

[MattBaggins]

24. It's because you dont care about us yellow spotted blue dog dems.

All you care about are the blue spotted yellow dogs.

And you won't of rid of the recommend button for everyone else but me.

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. I've been, quite frankly, shocked by some of the vile charges made against you, personally

And trumpeted on other blogs. They've been clearly false and incredibly irresponsible, and I wish people would see a person on the other side of the dispute they're in before they make such despicable accusations.

Honestly. If I were you, I would have shut this whole thing down when all that happened. Incredible.

[tallahasseedem]

31. I had no idea that this was going on...

that sucks. :(

[msanthrope]

147. Oh yeah, there's a hardcore bunch who post here

and then at other sites....

They spend a great deal of time trying to figure out Skinner's connection to the DLC, the Bilderburgers, and the Tri-Lateral Commisssion...

It would be comical, if it weren't so frackin' sad.

[Solly Mack]

27. I honestly was waiting because I couldn't decide what I wanted on my stickies.

I like to donate and do the stickies at the same time...instead of donating and then just holding off until I decide. Alas...since you've written such a thoughtful post...I'll vex myself with a decision still left unmade and go ahead and donate.

[liberalmike27]

28. None offer Critical Solutions So Far

I think the thing that has sent me off packing a few times is that it seems like you've rejected the most left of the left here. Like it or not, the professional left, the Green Party have no home if not here. Embrace us, if we're crazy, or if we're sane, we're part of the Democratic Party for the most part. There was a lot of scolding and demonizing during that Green Party campaign. I think a little more informing, and guiding those in states more important to vote for democrats would have been wiser.

And generally I don't mind the axing of clearly right-wingers. This isn't their place. By all means take the freepers away. But from time to time it seems like you guys are a little radical in the pursuit of this small, very boxed version of what democrats are. Being in the mold of an older Democrat, and wanting Democrats to fight back with more vim and vigor, rather than being so milquetoast, I don't really care for being scolded. This is a war of ideas. If we're trying to hold the line, when we do get pulled to the right a bit, there we are trying to hold the line again, and we're never going to get back to the left.

As an example, Thom Hartmann rather than just railing against Social Security repeal that republicans push, has been pushing for lowering the age to 55, and doubling the amount paid as a stimulus both to employment and the demand side. He wants to pay for it by raising the cap, or eliminating it. See, that's creative push-back. That represents Democrats really making progress, pulling to the left in that imaginary tug-of-war, rather than teetering on the edge of the mud in the middle, trying to hold our own on bad footing.

We say in the game of chess, if you play for a draw, you are likely to lose. If I had to pick a problem with the democratic party, and what little media we've had over the years, it'd be giving ground, rather than standing firm, making the case, and suggesting ideas that are even more radically left.

All of this would require less work by you too, having to take less posts off, be a little more relaxed about imposing your own version of everything, your own mores, you own boxed up ideas on the rest of us by your censorship. Your post reeks of you actually describing the very thing you seem to see as the problem, your own deleting of posts. Relax a little. We're all adults here, we can take a bit of abuse from others, we can argue amongst ourselves. Let it happen, as it fires us up, and if there is one thing we democrats all need is to be fired up a bit.

[liberalmike27]

52. I should add though

That this is a classic example of why net-neutrality is such a direct slash at more liberal sites who depend on contributions. If you can barely keep afloat, imagine if you were retired to a really slow tier of the Internet, because you could not pay.

Destroying Net Neutrality is exactly the taming of the Wild-Wild-West of the Internet, that they've done to television. They attack it daily, touting "the danger of the Internet, watch your kids wild predators abound, they have crazy leftish ideas there on the Internet we've gleaned from our sensible coverage," they say.

[woo me with science]

693. good post, too. nt

[Poboy]

182. Good post.

"Democratic Underground". The name suggests THIS is the mindset the site should exemplify. New ideas and commentary on how to persue progressive ideas. I'm fairly new, but I am a long time lurker/reader. This place used to be much more liberal/left/progressive.

I donated. Second time with a nice sized donation in as many months actually. Just decided to join because in the past 6 months I saw how the left was slowly being cut out, banned, censored, etc.

I thought I'd join to help in stopping the 'establishment' from completely taking this place over.

Member of the amateur left.

[woo me with science]

691. I agree with this.

Just relax, step back, and let us talk.

I personally am bothered by nothing on this board except attempts to control speech. The range of opinions here just makes DU richer.

To me, the vibrant discussions here among Democrats of all stripes are what makes DU feel like home.

[Mimosa]

1260. Thom has posted here and that is so COOL! n/t

[Tsiyu]

29. Times are tough

I hate that DU is struggling.

It's still the best place on the nets.

But people are confused and tired.



I would definitely participate in any surveys.

Hang in there, Skinner and Admins......:grouphug:

[Skinner]

39. To be clear, DU can survive a slow fund drive. I'm not concerned about our finances.

At least not yet.

I'm concerned about what the slow fund drive says about DU.

[annabanana]

56. I really think the economy is a bigger factor than factions are.

There is an overreaching general agreement on issues here with occasional elbows thrown on the means to the end... I don't think we're as divided as we appear.

[Tsiyu]

71. This community appreciates that

and also appreciates your willingness to listen.

[Hissyspit]

82. I was wondering why we didn't have the stickie specials?

$10 seems like a lot of money all if a sudden nowadays.

[nc4bo]

93. $5 half stickies would be cool w/me. Wouldn't mind sharing :)

$10 IS alot when there's only $30 in the pocket.

[tavalon]

276. I left for the first time early this summer

but it wasn't other people on the site, it was that I was so damn angry and depressed and found myself lashing out in unproductive ways. It has gotten harder here but I'm back because there isn't another place on the tubes with as many wonderful, cantankerous, caring, passionate, infuriating but highly informed people, bar none.

[Joanne98]

282. It saz the economy sux. Everybody's broke. Why don't you try an auction for the poor people.

There's a lot of talented crafts people on this forum. The starving artists. If we could donate something we made to an auction we could contribute more.

I don't think the infighting has anything to do with the slow fund drive. I think it's just that everybody's so broke. I know I am. It's not just DU. Other progessive sites have been having the same problem. Opednews was just complaining about the same thing. They only got 200 donations.

We need a new donation model. Let us donation handmade items so more people can contribute.

[enlightenment]

597. Thank you for being clear on that, Skinner.

It's hard to accept the 'won't make our goal' argument when the 'goal' is never defined. Some folks may have an idea of what you need to run this site, but I suspect most of us don't - so the 'goal' is a big mystery.

I'm very glad you realize that DU is suffering. Personally (purely personal and I don't think I have ever posted the thoughts until now), I think part of the problem began with the ridiculous, grade-school level 'rec/unrec' and the 'Greatest' category. It has created an atmosphere that allows people to click and run - and taken on a level of importance that often outweighs the subject introduced. It fosters divisiveness, because people react to that tiny number at the bottom of the box, rather than the content of the post.

This place shouldn't be a popularity contest, but that's what it feels like it has become. Low posters are still considered extremely suspect, often regardless of what they write, while high posters are still often considered 'wise' simply because they have racked up a very high number - regardless of how they reached that vaunted height. (I remember when you removed actual post count and replaced it with 1000+ - perhaps it would be worthwhile to evaluate post count as a visible feature?)

[Caliman73]

606. I wouldn't weigh the bickering too heavily as a factor in the slow drive.

I agree with those who think the economy and life in general are larger factors. Things are very strange and difficult right now as we witness the wealthy flexing their muscles despite the hope that many people felt at the election of an articulate, seemingly understanding president who wanted to change course. Many of us are struggling economically and emotionally trying to get our bearings and I think feeling very small in light of the media coverage of events and creating stories and information rather than reporting or analyzing what is out there.

[defendandprotect]

734. Can DU continue to survive this economy? That's the question?

Maybe you have to pick a side re jobs/employment/stimulus?

New Deal . . . or more Wall Street Deals?

[PassingFair]

1730. It says you've allowed 25 posters to run off half of your "base".

I hope you're being well compensated.

[Better Believe It]

I think the main problem is the economic crisis including joblessness and pay cuts.

And it's getting worse, not better.

But, DU will survive so stay strong.

Perhaps other ways of generating additional revenue to DU can be used.

Any ideas along those lines?

[defendandprotect]

738. Economic crisis will not be solved by right wing/corporate "remedies" ...!!

Nor Obama attacking Social Security and Medicare --

This ship of state has to be turned around otherwise things are going

to get much worse!

[derby378]

33. I'm really happy to be here

And I know all of us have strong disagreements with each other on a lot of issues, but I saw it as separating the wheat from the chaff so that we'd emerge stronger and more cohesive than ever before. Sadly, this has not happened.

Maybe we all need to get back to basics, myself included. What do we want for this nation? For our party? For our President? For Congress? For the next Democratic President? The answers don't have to be that deep, but they do have to be meaningful.

Thank you, Skinner, EarlG, and Elad, for putting up with us as much as you have and still seeing something in our community worth fighting for.

[uncommon]

34. Just bc the POTUS is a Dem, doesn't mean he can fix the world overnight.

He is making progress - and he and the rest of the Dems still need our support.

[seabeyond]

37. well, now, isn't your post kinda the way of the world and an example of exactly what obama faces

you do very good exploring the issues and problems du faces. you articulate them well. you clearly see how others feel. you are able to state how you feel clearly and still....

there is no easy answer. you can not create the utopia we are all demanding

i find your post really interesting. i can also appreciate what you are saying. and i agree with you absolutely. and i thank you for the time in saying this

and see, even with that, i too have no answers, but i can hear where you are coming from

and wouldn't it be nice if we could have people that could look at the whole, and even the specifics and sit there, without the answer and

without the accusations, insistence of right, demand our way... knowing

it is not that easy.

life

[Whisp]

46. good post, sea.. ;)

[Skinner]

69. I think you are right.

As a matter of fact, I think being the admin of DU makes me feel somewhat sympathetic to President Obama.

[tavalon]

292. LOL

I can't imagine why! Having met two out of the three of you in person and having looked into your eyes (creepy throwback to Putin-Bushy) I know you are good people who are being demonized for no good reason and likely can't find a happy medium.

[Javaman]

306. Herding cats. lol nt

[Sapphocrat]

994. I'm sure it does.

But (and you knew there was a "but" coming), you have an advantage over Obama: You've been doing this for nearly ten years. What that indicates to me, I'll keep to myself, as I'm not ready to be TS'd -- but I will risk this much: The one thing you definitely have in common with the President is that you both asked for the job.

Oh, the hell with worrying about it -- this may be my final post (that's up to you), but here goes:

Look, David, I'm not entirely unsympathetic -- I've tried to herd cats myself -- but you've fallen into a very common trap: You've spent the past couple of years (since the primaries) trying to quash every little problem with another rule here, another rule there -- some of them astonishingly pointless and utterly ridiculous (e.g., calling Obama "Barry" = punishable offense), and others -- many unspoken -- unbelievably dictatorial (e.g., banning people for posting a certain number, or asking a question about that certain number).

It's gotten to the point that DU is completely hamstrung. You've got myriad, often incomprehensible, rules that do little to advance any solutions, and you've got at least half this board too afraid of being axed to say anything of value any longer. Does it surprise you that those you haven't tombstoned already have just given up and walked away?

And what is the point of rules that intimate anyone into silence? You may as well tombstone half the board; you are going to silence people either out of fear or out of force. What's the difference, when the end result is the same -- silence?

The "old" DU -- yeah, I miss it too, a lot. The old DU was about issues and principles -- it wasn't a damned fan club. Now it is; what other excuse could there be for censoring valid criticism of Obama's positions and policies when so many are the very same positions and policies we were all railing against under Bush?

The real problem, David? You've lost sight of your own mission statement:

"Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates."

The board is not being "generally supportive of progressive ideals" when those who criticize Obama for failing to support progressive ideals himself end up muted and/or banned.

Whatever happened to the DU I remember, where if we agreed on nothing else on a given day, we all never failed to agree that "dissent is patriotic"?

At the same time, you overlook that the furthest left of us still "support Democratic candidates for political office" -- as best we can. What more can you ask? That we sign a loyalty oath? That we produce copies of our ballots to prove we voted a straight Democratic ticket? That we lie and promise to vote for the homophobic, anti-choice candidate just because he or she has a D after his or her name?

Well, if that's what you want, David, then you've already chosen a side.

As as far DU not being affiliated with the Democratic Party, who (besides your lawyers) cares if it is or not? For all intents and purposes, it functions as an arm of the party.

You want my advice? Probably not, but I'll give it to you anyway.

What I would do if I were you:

Kill the mountains of rules. Go back to "no personal attacks," no assassination jokes, and no explicit sex threads, and start over from there. And let people say "Fuck you" and "STFU, asshole." You let us get away with that much in the good old days, and the world didn't end -- and I never once saw you not meet your fundraising goal (whatever that was or is).

Jesus Christ, David, we're all supposed to be adults here -- let us hash it out amongst ourselves. Stop playing Daddy. You're not Daddy -- and no amount of rulemaking is going to give you a handle on this. It just pisses people off and makes them go away (whether voluntarily or not).

Remember: People either live up to or down to the expectations you have of them. If you're going to treat people like children, they're going to act like children. If you demonstrate that you trust adults to act like adults, they usually do.

Finally, apologize to and invite back all the LGBTers banned in the purge no one is supposed to talk about. Some people who have been warned, suspended repeatedly, and banned suddenly resurface out of nowhere and are welcomed back like the Prodigal Son. Others, whose "offenses" (e.g., posting that certain number) are "disappeared" forever. Do you see the mixed message you're sending? Do you see why it appears you play favorites, and just hope no one notices?

Now, seriously, David: Do you really wonder why some people don't want to pay for that?

I guess now I'll probably be the first of the next purge for saying all this -- but if I am, at least I'll go to bed tonight with a clear conscience.

And if I don't get the chance again, I want to thank you for a wonderful experience overall -- the first six years were damned good. The last few, not so much.

[Mithreal]

1019. Very well said.

:applause:

[Prism]

1024. +7

[NMMNG]

1040. +7

I loved this place when we could actually discuss things.

Now it's a matter of strict message control. If I wanted to pay someone to tell me what to say I'd join a church or a fan club.


Obama is not the Democratic Party. He will not be in office forever. If we are to be censured and even purged simply for disagreeing (even vehemently) with a single Democratic politician, how can this be called a discussion forum?


Furthermore, as a member of the LGBT community, I can't fathom donating to a board that's openly hostile to me and mine, and to our concerns which are constantly dismissed as petty, paltry, trivial, "wedge issues" and otherwise of no consequence to anybody here except when it comes time to ask for money/votes or to blame someone because the Dems lost another one.

[jannyk]

1057. Beautiful Post!

[nashville_brook]

1062. the fact that this poster knows that speaking freely is a punishable offense, sums up the problem

better than any other post here. you can't have a "discussion" board where *this degree* of fear of speech is common. it's oxymoronic.

without freedom to speak, you don't have a discussion, and you've lost the reason to have a discussion board.

[seabeyond]

1068. but this is where i have the problem. all the years on du, no, i dont see that the poster has a

reason to be worried about tombstoning. as a matter of fact thought his/her post good EXCEPT all the "probably get tombstoned". i think that is so off base. i havent been easy. i dont concern self with tombstoning. and i certainly dont continually welcome it in my post

is it a legit concern? or a fabricated one?

and i mean it RESPECTFULLY just not in agreement.

[nashville_brook]

1183. it's something that's easy not to see b/c someone is gone...they're gone

[seabeyond]

1313. i have followed a lot of people gone.

not some of them so i can't speak for that. but good people that are gone. and they did something that got them kicked out, or kick me out... tyoe posts or whatever. i havent seen where just differing opinion means gone. i have had differing opinion so much. so many people have. and i dont see gone with that.

now, saying, i dont particpate in gdp cause there is so much fighting without listening. and there is another situation i hear about that i dont know cause wasnt there.

but i do watch a lot of the gone.

[AngryOldDem]

1267. And DU wonders why it's having trouble raising money.

Who wants to pay for the "privilege" of one's own self-censorship? When you are afraid to post your own opinions on a site supposedly set up for that very activity, that pretty much makes said site worthless.

[Catherina]

1436. What you just said needs to be in big BOLD letters.

Who wants to pay for the "privilege" of one's own self-censorship? When you are afraid to post your own opinions on a site supposedly set up for that very activity, that pretty much makes said site worthless.

[flyarm]

1561. +1 while a select group is allowed to break all the rules , tag team others and be disrespectful in

every way, and have an ugly arrogance , because they know there will be no accountability for their own behavior.

We all know who some of those people are, who seem to have a privilege others don't.

It is abundantly obvious!

I lose my generosity when I see bullies get away with bullying and actually smearing it in others faces!

I can not and will not contribute to anything or any place that allows that behavior and that is obviously allowed, and perpetrated against a majority.

[AngryOldDem]

1617. Here's why I'm not donating.

1) Obvious reason: Funds are tight.

2) I find DU exhausting anymore. I can't keep up with all the drama, battle lines, ad hominems in lieu of civil discussion, differing opinions called out as disruptions and those same opinions suddenly flushed down the memory hole because they don't fit the groupthink. (And, more often than not, their authors quickly follow them.)

I find with maybe the exception of one of the subforums, I don't post much anymore. I have better ways to spend my time, and given that I'm not one of the heavy hitters here anyway, my presence and pittance of a donation most likely won't be missed. Oh well. I'll live.

3) The bias and favoritism here that often flies in the face of the stated rules, as developed and then enforced by the administrators and moderators. (As you note.) What tore it for me was the readmission of a poster who threatened violence against another member. I saw those posts, and I was stunned at both the vitriol and the arrogant presumption that he was untouchable: If anyone deserved a permanent ban, it was that poster. But, the next thing I saw, the poster was back -- and with a hero's welcome, no less.

The only thing I can think of is that this poster is part of the DU "in-crowd," a big fish in a small Internet pond, someone who this site (for whatever reason) apparently decided it could not do without, rules be damned. I think his reinstatement was a huge slap in the face not only to the threatened member, but to this community as well. The admins' backtracking spoke volumes. Sure, they, and by extension their mods, can do what they want, how they want, when they want -- and that is also a part of the problem here. But some things should be non-negotiable if a site like DU is to have any integrity both within its community and outside it. DU has just about compromised itself beyond recognition, with this incident being the most egregious example. But what is perhaps the saddest thing, I was not the least bit surprised.

[Lorien]

1269. Excellent point. nt

[jgraz]

1081. .

dup

[jgraz]

1082. Rarely do I see a post where I completely agree with every word.

This is one of those rare times.

Every. Goddamn. Word.

[havocmom]

1086. About says it for me too. Thank you

Throw in the points Ignis has made about bullies getting away with rule violations demonstrating the uneven application of all those rules and all I can add is this: Message control only works in fantasy land. It the real world, it will always fail to varying degrees.

[seabeyond]

1115. how do you allow the fuck you and shut the fuck up (which i love and remember) yet

eliminate the bully. dont you have to say no to the fuck you, to stop the bullying.

i say this cause isnt this like the contradicitive demands made by posters that we are seeing thru out this thread

which i find more interesting, lol than original subject, because these type threads interest me.

[havocmom]

1144. swearing is swearing. Bullying is not the same

I have seen bullies continually try to apply labels which are repugnant to most here to posters in an attempt to bully them into silence. No swearing involved.

The tag team crap and rovian framing to try to make a poster feel they are somehow like a republican is bullying. No swearing involved.

Sorry, but it's bogus and some of us just won't put up with others being treated badly just to shut them up.

[seabeyond]

1154. people are talking about how hard it is in discussing.

so on some posts i have tried to discuss. and it is not going so well. let me ask, do you really see it only those that have issue with obama being the ones shut down? do you not equally see posts, when seeing something obama has done, that those people are being shut down, too.

i dont have a toe in this fight. i have chosen not to say a god damn thing on policy threads, because i see it as a lose, regardless of the position.

so i shut the fuck up, .... because of both sides.

dont i get to be pissed and not gonna take it, too? but, how i see it is both have reasonable arguments, so, i stay out of it.

[havocmom]

1274. Ask me anything you want

But I see no point in answering.

[seabeyond]

1315. really? wow. hm.

how have i become the enemy. cause i never thought you and i had issue. and i certainly havent become that thru the obama issue, cause i stay out of them, for the most part.

[BootinUp]

1242. lol me too. nt

[Go2Peace]

1472. I agree it was a great post but that is the one thing I would rather not see

I can see saying "fuck that shit" which would be a reference to the ideas, but "Fuck you" is just not going to work as for most people that is an extremely aggressive insult.

[Starry Messenger]

1096. +7

I'm glad I opened this thread again. A gem of a post Sapphocrat.

[Spheric]

1128. +7

[unapatriciated]

1139. ..

:applause:

That is the DU Lame54 made a vid for long ago (unfortunately youtube censored it because of a song in the background). We should be able to speak our minds and explain why we hold certain views without fear of a cold pizza. Separate groups does nothing to change the direction of our party and is just an echo chamber.

[Raster]

1152. Thank you, Sapphocrat!!!

Word!

[Stinky The Clown]

I totally agree with you

I would love it if our banished gay brothers and sisters would be invited back and given back their names and post counts, too.

[Mimosa]

1270. I didn't even know about that...

I am part of the LGBT community but have seldom posted in that forum. I don't know that there was ever a 'purge' here. Somebody PM me.

[tishaLA]

1173. +7

[kiva]

1203. Brilliant. +1 n/t

[Bluebear]

1230. +7

[BootinUp]

1244. -7

[girl gone mad]

1346. +14

[BootinUp]

1511. lol nt

[Duncan Grant]

1248. +7

Finally, apologize to and invite back all the LGBTers banned in the purge no one is supposed to talk about. Some people who have been warned, suspended repeatedly, and banned suddenly resurface out of nowhere and are welcomed back like the Prodigal Son. Others, whose "offenses" (e.g., posting that certain number) are "disappeared" forever. Do you see the mixed message you're sending? Do you see why it appears you play favorites, and just hope no one notices?

Ab-so-freakin-lutely. :thumbsup:

[Lorien]

1262. Agreed. And I do wish that we COULD agree to disagree and that dissent

was still considered the highest form of patriotism. I fall into the "principles over individual politicians" group; I'll never be a DLC New Democrat (old Republican), I'll always be anti-war, anti-bigotry, pro-environment, pro-education, pro-worker, pro-single payer, etc. etc. I believe that we Traditional Democrats still remain a strong majority here at DU, though often we are treated as traitors to the party and many of us have been banned or have left DU because we refuse to move to the Right and support the very things that we fought against since 2000. Just as in the mainstream media; the bullies to our Right are the loudest and they insist that everyone fall in line with their demands. That's just not going to happen. Either we agree to disagree or go our separate ways. As Sapphocrat said; we're all supposed to be adults here -- let us hash it out amongst ourselves. Let's kill the mountains of rules.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

1288. *blinks*

*Stands and applauds in affirmation*

Nothing more to say.

[Political_Junkie]

1305. I agree with this wholeheartedly.

That's it right there. How can we discuss anything when we're all walking on egg shells wondering if we'll be the next to go? Especially those of us in the LGBT community, should we be afraid to stand up for ourselves? Maybe at a teaparty rally, but not here.
I've tried to avoid all the bullshit here lately, but in doing so, I feel like a traitor to my own ideals. "There comes a time when silence is betrayal.", by not sticking up for those who are feeling thrown under the bus I'm allowing it to happen.
I like coming here to DU, but I don't love it anymore. However, I do still love the members of this dysfunctional family. The thread last week when we worked to help out Rocky reminded me of the old DU. It's what we do, when we're allowed to do, but lately there seems to be more not allowed, than allowed. Seriously, when someone's acting like an asshole, the only answer they deserve is, "STFU, Asshole!" It doesn't necessarily mean you don't love the asshole, we all need a smack down once in awhile.
Anyway, for what it's worth I prefer a big tent, with lots of rowdy customers, that's why I'm here.

[inna]

1318. Great post. Thank you, this had to be said. nt

[Jakes Progress]

1321. + a lot. This sums it up. This is a long thread and

somewhere above someone pointed out that the progressive, very left make up the majority of DU members. It is easy to see in the posts that make it most often to the greatest list, not just from the recs but from the number of positive responses vs. negative responses to posts that urge Obama (sometimes with much feeling) to get his act together and start being progressive. If, like the DLC, DU wants to turn on its base, then it will have the same problems the DLC has but without the mega money from the corporate world.

[leftyclimber]

1350. +7

[LoZoccolo]

1352. More "gay purge" accusations without explanation of why there would even be

a gay purge at all, or why more gay and lesbian DUers remain than were tombstones. Maybe if you're feeling so bold tonight you could explain these things plainly rather than implying there's some agenda that wouldn't even make sense if it was really happening.

[flvegan]

1362. Sigh.

Poor, clueless woodchuck.

[LoZoccolo]

1366. It's not like you can just say that to make it look like there's a reason or something.

No one ever uses arrogance as a mask for disingenuousness or anything.

[flvegan]

1369. When something is mentioned

a dozen times by different people in one thread, and each one is given a positive response (suggesting it was witnessed/experienced by them), one would have to somehow allow that maybe there's substance (unless one is an idiot). Such a thing *might* lead one to do...oh, I don't know, a Google search.

Go enlighten yourself.

[LoZoccolo]

1386. There are a lot of people questioning Obama's birth certificate too.

I'm not an idiot for not checking that out myself, or for being skeptical based on even my cursory knowledge of it which has yielded enough information for me to assume that the conspiracy theory is junk.

I've read a lot about this "purge". I went to Old Elm Tree even before it was cool and read about it in a place where people could say anything they want. I've never heard a motive, and I've never heard a reason why it would be conducted in such an ineffective manner if there was any intention to get rid of gay and lesbian members. It certainly didn't get rid of the person who does a search of my threads like every day (I know this because the responses come long after the thread has passed off of the front page) and personally attacks me.

[flvegan]

1387. Enjoy those blinders, little woodchuck. n/t

[LoZoccolo]

1388. The "truthers" like to use that one too. n/t

[donco6]

1553. Here's a list of the dead:

Solon
Yardwork
Vanje
Runcible Spoon (previously known as FarceofNature)
Marrah G
Sundog
TechBear Seattle
Zuiderelle (previously known as PelosiFan)
Dbackjon
Maven (previously known as HarveyKorman)
Sheets of Easter
Haruka
Sniffa
KitchenWitch

We're not supposed to talk of the disappeared, but you did ask, after all.

[LoZoccolo]

1567. I did not ask for the list of the dead; I've seen it before.

[Jamastiene]

1610. Forgot one...

Midlo, a strong GLBT ally who was TSed for no good reason.

[lost-in-nj]

1680. +11's

thanks for the list....

and we both know there are more gone that are not on here......
if I mention the dead this will get deleted


it's a case of you reap what you sow......


lost

[alcibiades_mystery]

1734. All well-deserved

Good riddance.

It's a pretty simple ethical rule: you don't go into somebody's house and shit the rug. Whatever delusional excuses you make up beyond that, I'll leave to you. Each of those posters left fairly massive stains on the carpets.

[SoxFan]

1359. There was no "purge"

Some DUers acted like jerks and got what they had coming to them. Their sexuality had nothing to do with it.

Stop it.

[kiva]

1446. If acting like a jerk caused people to be automatically

tombstoned, this thread wouldn't be nearly this long...in fact, it may not have been needed at all.

[LWolf]

1648. Good point.

As a matter of fact, if acting like a jerk caused an automatic tombstone, you wouldn't have needed to explain. There would have been no one to explain to.

[Shining Jack]

1691. Lol !

Well said.

[Brickbat]

1696. It was just being jerks? Then I'm looking forward to seeing them around here again soon. Because

as near as I can tell, when a jerk is tombstoned, he can be reinstated. Eventually.

[swimboy]

1372. I'm bewildered by my own current discomfort.

But I think you've given voice to its core. There have been so many people here that I have loved and been loyal to, probably outweighing the love/loyalty offered me, but I tend to be prodigal with both once I trust someone. Oh, and I've enjoyed some infrequent and rollicking fights as well.

Now, I don't understand why I just don't feel like jumping in, even in the rare case I see someone for whom I care. I just don't know why I'm no longer comfortable. It's not fear but it does feel like caution.

There was a wonderful corps of LGBTers and amazing straight allies who had each others support and spoke out when issues arose (such as the weird Superbowl Snickers controversy)--strongly to our antagonists and more gently to people who honestly did not understand, but were hoping to get a clearer understanding by discussing it with folks on the front line.

So many are gone. I think they should have the option of returning but the train may have left the station.

This was the site of my joyous "internet adolescence". I was reckless, unguarded and honest and I had a ball. And I just don't understand my current hesitation to interact.

[shireen]

1392. thanks!

:applause:

[leftstreet]

1400. +1

Very well said

[laughingliberal]

1411. Excellent post! nt

[Catherina]

1434. Who are you and where did you come from? Excellent, honest post.

Thank you for your courage. I hope your post helps DU understand without any rancor.

[Jamastiene]

1443. +7

It needed to be said and you said it much better than I could. GLBT is has turned into one of those ghost land forums where only one or two people post OPs and those OPs seem to echo into the darkness, because most GLBT people on DU have either been TSed, left out of disgust, or have been silenced into oblivion for fear of being TSed.

[woo me with science]

1505. BEST POST ON THE THREAD....+1000000000

This is exactly the problem. Thank you for stating it so powerfully.

[John Agar]

1512. Thank you for posting this.

I am still new, but this tells me all I need to know and answers a lot of my questions about this forum.

Also, this has to be the best written, most eloquent thing I have ever had the pleasure of reading on the internet.

The fact that someone like yourself feels this alienated, well it speaks volumes to me about what has gone on here.

Thanks again.

John.

[Scurrilous]

1620. I loved John Agar

Esp. in "Big Jake."

:P

[flyarm]

1560. Excellent post, Excellent points! That should be listened to if this place is to survive! eom

[Generic Other]

1600. I want to know what people think

I oppose censoring opinions. Being bullied into silence is the worst form of censorship. I would rather be told I am stupid for what I am thinking than told to STFU.

Thanks Sapphocat for being brave enough to voice one of the very real issues DU faces.

[racaulk]

1622. +7

Fan-damn-TASTIC post!!! Thank you for posting this, and I agree wholeheartedly with every single word.

I would love to see Skinner reply to this, but I doubt he will.

Thank you, Sapphocrat!

:applause:

[LWolf]

1649. Thanks.

:applause:

[RainDog]

1659. +7

there's a lot of stuff that went on here that I never knew about.

then I went back and read actual threads.

If Will Pitt is allowed back on this site after the threats that he made, there is NO REASON for KitchenWitch or Midlo, for instance, to be banned from this site. Probably plenty of others, too.

The current lounge league that gets its panties in a wad over Wilford Brimley? That whole thing is an embarrassment to this site. Someone went off because he was embarrassed by something he had posted early that bothered someone. He then attacked someone else for posting a silly DANCE MIX that used the word "diabetes" because the word, "beat," was part of that word... it was about dance mixes and the juxtaposition of this old guy saying "beat, beat."

Someone took offense at this as tho it were somehow attacking people with diabetes. You have to be humorless or intentionally looking for a reason to find offense (to cover your own embarrassment?) if you do not understand that a dance mix with Brimley has absolutely nothing to do with people with diabetes. Others joined this person and pretended that compassion was the same thing as "I don't like your humor."

I can provide links to these threads for people who want to read them and see how utterly ridiculous this moment was.

Yet, people here pretend there is some sort of "bullying" when someone posts anything that has to do with Brimley - tho the reason it is posted is because the entire situation was about nothing other than someone's DESIRE TO TAKE OFFENSE. It's not bullying to say that you are ridiculous if you make a dance mix with Wilford Brimley a "cause for offense in defense" of those with illnesses.

...Especially when a trained psychologist on the thread, for instance, talked about the ways that people deal with their problems in different ways... the whole idea of humor as a way to gain strength in the face of some difficulty is valid.

Yet not in the lounge.

However, in spite of noting that this sort of idiocy is something moderators must deal with, I do think that a big, big reason that contributions are down is because people are hurting in this economy.

I bet that if steps were taken to improve the economy - the sorts of things the govt needs to do to deal with a depression (or, the biggest, longest most painful recession of all time since we can't call it a depression) people would be able to contribute more and they would have more emotional resources to deal with one another.

[lost-in-nj]

1688. Silence......

I believe that is the key word.....good choice.........


I think that is the problem ...... some if us were not loud enough...
while others had nothing better to do than yell and alert ... if i go amy further this post will be deleted....


lost

[RetroLounge]

1712. +7

:applause:

RL

[in_cog_ni_to]

1758. I agree with every word! n/t

[MessiahRp]

1458. Here's the difference..

No matter how hard each faction pulls on you over issues you at least are listening to your liberal critics... we have a serious spot at the table here.

And EarlG isn't going around calling us "fucking retards". ;-)

FWIW, it's not the warring that has prevented me from donating, it's my finances. You'll see a donation when I receive my 9/16 paycheck my friend. I need to get a new DU sticker as well, my old one faded to the point of being unreadable.

Rp

[Kadie]

274. Well said seabeyond.

Very well said.

[EnlightenedOne]

302. You've nailed it Seabeyond

Excellent.

[flamingdem]

674. Civil discussion is underrated here and out there nt

[readmoreoften]

1377. Yeah, it's also what Bush faced. It's what every president faces.

And at some point they have to stand for something. And you have to accept that if you abandon a segment of your party platform in order to go bipartisan and embrace the values of your opposition, then a chunk of your own party are going to leave you because they're going to see you as the face of the opposition you chose to embrace.

The other path involves having principles and risking your own personal position of power to try to make real change.

If you play it by the numbers--by "how many voters can I appeal to by watering down my platform"--you might get voters in the short-term, but in the long term you get mud.

[Boojatta]

38. Your diagnosis suggests a solution...

Split General Discussion into two forums:

1. GD for people who think that President Obama is performing well

2. GD for people who think that President Obama is performing badly

******

You should also consider revising the rec/ unrec system. Here's my attempt to describe the problem:

Blind Taste Test Results: 42% dislike taste of Pepsi. Only 17% dislike taste of Coke.

Does Pepsi win?

What if more than 42 percent dislike the taste of Pepsi and fewer than 17 percent dislike the taste of Coke?

Pepsi thread on DU:
20 recs
15 unrecs
15/35 dislike the taste of the thread
15/35 happens to be more than 42%

Coke thread on DU:
5 recs
1 unrec
1/6 dislike the taste of the thread
1/6 happens to be less than 17%

Does that description of the problem suggest a solution to you?

[WI_DEM]

57. and what of a third option for people who think Obama is right on some issues and wrong on others--I

doubt that is the solution.

[Boojatta]

68. If you don't fall into either of the two opposed sides...

then you can select the GD forum to post in on a case-by-case basis, depending on the content of each specific message that you decide to post.

[SoCalDem]

85. Deep six the whole rec-unrec thing.. It's not necessary

View count shows that at least people read what you wrote. If the thread is worthy, replying keeps it alive.. If not, it sinks.. that worked well for many years .. The whole junior high aspect of "I like you, so I'll rec..but if I don't like you, I'll unrec just 'cuz" is annoying beyond belief.

I have seen long posts made and as soon as they show up, there are unrec before anyone could have even had time to read the damned thing. If someone does not like the topic, there is no requirement that they read it, but to unrec something (or rec, for that matter) without commenting on or reading it is childish, and makes this place less fun.

There used to be real discussions going on, without personal attacks, but in the past few years it's not that common anymore.

Apparently there are some here who are avid "scorekeepers" and who hold grudges.

I hope this whole thing can get sorted out.. DU used to be a lot more productive & there was a camaraderie that's missing now.

[Matariki]

370. That's not really true

OPs with high post counts are usually flame wars dragging out sometimes for days. While good, informative posts often sink because apart from saying 'good post' there's no controversy to keep it afloat.

[iris27]

922. So keep the recs but ditch unrecs.

We had recommendations around for quite a while before the unrec option was added.

[DirkGently]

721. Yep. Unrec favors the ill-tempered

[geek tragedy]

91. How would that work, though?

People would still argue and point out inaccuracies in those forums.

Rec system works pretty well right now I think.

[Boojatta]

96. We want people to point out inaccuracies.

The difference between a slanderous accusation and an unpleasant truth is that slander isn't true.

[geek tragedy]

114. There is no agreement on what is truth around here. nt

[Boojatta]

210. Moderators have to agree with each other to arrive at a consensus.

[backscatter712]

230. Add a third forum: the Thunderdome!

We all know that there WILL be flame wars. So the simplest thing to do is take ANY thread that degenerates into a flame fest and dump it into the Thunderdome forum. Those who want to fight can slug it out there, and keep the other forums unpolluted.

[NightWatcher]

41. As I see the "2 sides" of the new DU...

I don't know the percentage of the split in the two main factions, but I see the split between (in the broadest terms):

Side A: Obama is the President and a Democrat, therefore we'll (here on DU) give him the benefit of the doubt, believe his intentions to be true, and support MOST everything he and his Administration does without question.

Side B: Obama is the President and a Democrat, BUT his actions do not go far enough for us (more Progressive-leaning Side B'ers). We will criticize and hold his feet to the fire until we feel that he is acting more like a true Progressive, even if he ran as a moderate Democrat.

I'm a "Side B'er" and feel that often when legit criticism is leveled against the President or against any "Side A'ers", the criticism is treated like "bashing" or name calling, and often becomes "message deleted" and we become "name removed". I dont have much money to spare in these horrible economic times, so I have to think hard if I want to use it to support a place where it feels sometimes that I am not wanted and regarded the same as some freeper troll, as I am not. I worked for Georgian's for Change and Floridians for Change going back well before Super Tuesday. I cant stand being treated as a freeper by many because I level criticism and fail to fall lock step behind our Leader. It can always be better, and in times like these, Much Better, so I'm going to work for that, even if it falls outside of support for "official" DLC and DCCC policies and blind loyalty.

When the balance is restored, I think DU will become the DU of old that we keep hearing of, where peace and Progressivism rule.

[KittyWampus]

49. I see it- those of us who are liberal and see the Good AND Bad. And those who only see the bad

and think they define what being a liberal is.

[seabeyond]

it is obvious you are a B'er from your perception and description of the A'er, which is one of the

problems. that is not an accurate way of seeing the A'er but it is a way to not listen to them or not respect them. being the B'er, you have created a less than desirable A'er for your own justification of being a B'er, lol

and i say that in respect and appreciation, lol. i agree with you often

[NightWatcher]

80. I hate that it has turned into factions. I used to disagree with some on some points and agree

on others, now it's become "you people" this and that on both sides.

The reason we've not hit a fundraising goal.........half of us feel unwanted and alienated. No, I'm not going to donate where I'm not wanted.

[seabeyond]

109. you are right. i haev been listening to totally smart people who we use to be in agreement

often state that. but the other side feel exactly. the. same. way.

i dont get into the political threads much at all anymore, because, lol lol.... i see what everyone is saying and disagree with how everyone is saying it. so on du, i jump into non political threads, mostly.

[liberalmike27]

84. I Have to Agree

Nothing pisses me off more than getting a little message scolding me for expressing my more left, than this, opinions on DU.

Like I said earlier, how does one expect we'll pull back to the left, without actually trying.

Instead, we've been trying to hold the line, and over the last 30 years, and getting pulled steadily to the right. Let us argue and realize that most people who are on the left are just the type of people who don't want someone to govern every word we say, and delete our posts.

There are tens of thousands of message boards out there, and if you think you're ideas will be rejected, a lot of us will go there. That said, I do like to stop by from time to time. I like finding a bit on Keith that I missed, or that I want to show someone else that might have missed it.

[girl gone mad]

228. I just got tired of being bashed..

for having principles.

Who knew that all of that stuff we relentlessly opposed back when Bush was president would turn out to be really super awesome when Obama did it?

[defendandprotect]

745. Attacks on criticism of Obama are fine -- we can handle it -- HOWEVER, where it

goes over the line is when those trying to protect Obama/admnistration move

DU/Skinner to ridiculous "New Rules" --

Btw, anyone seen the how ridiculous those New Rules look when someone like Thom Hartmann

puts them up on his website?

[laughingliberal]

1412. +1 nt

[flyarm]

1568. Absolutely! 100% correct!!!

[tavalon]

301. LOL

Peace at DU is a long wished for state and is about as rare as a unicorn.

[jeff47]

918. The fallacy is that nobody is always in one of those two camps

Any thinking individual will move between your "group A" and "group B" depending on what is being discussed. Heck, within a complex enough topic, like HCR, one can be both an A and B depending on which part is being discussed.

My problem with DU is the loss of critical thinking. Take a look at your definitions of the two groups, and how absolute they are. Group A supports Obama "without question". Group B always thinks Obama doesn't go far enough, ever. There's no analysis of what he's actually _DOING_ on the relevant topic.

It's an immediate leap to "Obama never, ever, ever, ever, ever does enough so I'm going to complain even when he does something good". Or "Obama can't get _____ through the Senate, so he's off the hook for everything he doesn't accomplish".

Sometimes he lets us down. Sometimes he does good. Sometimes he's blocked by morons in the Senate. Sometimes he leans on Senators to get stuff done.

Absolute positions are fine when talking about policy. They are terrible when talking about politicians.

[KittyWampus]

42. People who are CONSTANTLY negative are just that- Negative.

It's not the criticism of Democrats and Obama. It's the same posters who are relentlessly negative and NEVER acknowledge the positive.

It isn't about choosing sides. So frankly I think you've avoided the issue.

I don't mind the criticism if it comes from a poster who is even-handed and honest enough to give credit and deal in reality.

Posters who are here to do absolutely nothing but find fault are legion. And they are the reason I refuse to donate anymore. I don't come here that often anymore.

I am not a "cheerleader". Check my Journal. But negativity and cynicism just for the sake of it are a waste of time.

[Bobbie Jo]

63. +1000

I only have a second, but I couldn't agree more.

[liberalmike27]

90. Negative

is far too often used instead of the proper word, disagree. If someone disagrees with you, or Obama, it isn't negative, it's just disagreement. Let's use the more accurate word, then you'll see why it makes people mad when they disagree, and their posts are deleted.

I think a lot of center-democrats fail to see that when you put a centrist in any position, then the compromise will end up far to the right. Put a liberal in, and you'll end up with something more to the center, as well as a person who actually expresses a more viable, leftish idea.

[KittyWampus]

99. Sorry, it isn't 'disagree'. There are plenty of things that Obama/Democrats do that I don't like

so I actually AGREE with quite a bit of the criticism or can relate to the core displeasure.

However, I also am capable of looking at the big picture and seeing why a certain course is being pursued- even if it doesn't go directly to my preferred goal.

I am also capable of appreciating the positive which is something a huge number of DU'ers absolutely refuse to do.

They have their narrative and stick to it.

[liberalmike27]

130. What Exactly are You Speaking of

Which positive things? The Lilly Ledbetter act was good.

Some of us just don't like the role of cheer-leader.

[tomp]

280. your implication is that you have a monopoly on what the big picture is.

you don't, i do.

pessimism is a necessary counterbalance to optimism.

the literature on pessimism/optimism shows that optimists tend to be happy and successful while pessimists tend to have a more accurate view of the world.

based on this relatively "scientific" fact, those who are unable to find anything good about obama are more likely to be right than those who cannot find fault with him.

[readmoreoften]

1114. Apparently you have your narrative and you stick to it as well.

You silence your agreements with the left because you believe you are capable of seeing "the big picture." Maybe others are capable of seeing the big picture too, and it is a thoroughly different big picture than yours. Maybe those people get their "big picture" from actual study of the facts and the situations on the ground as opposed to blind faith in the goodness of a political figure within a quite obviously corrupt system.

[Mariana]

716. There are people here who are relentlessly negative

no matter what the topic is. A few go so far as to grossly exaggerate or even outright lie about the content of the posts of the people they're arguing with, when the actual posts aren't offensive. That isn't simply disagreement.

[laughingliberal]

1417. There are people on here who are hungry and sleeping in their cars.

They are relentlessly negative about current economic policy and further attacks on our social safety net. They are told they are relentlessly negative when they bring these issues up.

People who are in better circumstances can't seem to see they are trying to affect some change before those who criticize them get to find out firsthand what all the negativity is about.

[jeff47]

940. I'm not the OP

But here would be an example.

Our last "combat troops" withdrew from Iraq ahead of schedule. A thread starts to celebrate this particular event.

Someone who disagrees with Iraq policy would say something like "Great! Good job getting those troops out like you said you would. Now get the rest out!"

Someone who is negative will say something like "Obama the warmonger just loves wars and is identical to Bush. Why are you all celebrating the deaths of millions of innocents?! You should all be ashamed!".

The latter isn't disagreement on policy. It's just bashing.

"I think a lot of center-democrats fail to see that when you put a centrist in any position, then the compromise will end up far to the right."

This, IMO, is an artifact of our current members of Congress and not a rule. An actual centrist would compromise with both sides. The cowards currently serving in Congress who label themselves "centrist" aren't. They're just obsessed with hanging on to their seats, and foolishly believe the R's are giving them good advice on how to do so. They also operate under the delusion that the R's won't attack them if they just go along with what the R's want, thus ensuring their continued place in Congress.

Fortunately, it's a plan that fails spectacularly. So such people are gradually being replaced. Unfortunately, that word "gradually" is in my previous sentence.

[malaise]

104. Good post

:hi:

[Stinky The Clown]

116. A lot of what manifests as criticsim of Obama is actually a dislike for the other poster

We can't call each other names so we call that which each other supports names.

[Renew Deal]

239. Which also brings up the Unrec feature which is a negative feature.

You're "unreccing" someones thread and dealing with the aftermath of seemingly innocent threads being unrecced for no obvious reason. It's doubly bad and should be eliminated.

[DirkGently]

737. Agreed. This seems to be emerging as a theme ...

[Greyhound]

549. So I checked your journal and find not one entry that is in any way critical of this

administration's policies. Re-posted articles with no commentary is not criticism, it is simply cut & paste.

[Subdivisions]

575. So, you're saying he negative nellies need to go? TSed all negativity? n/t

[shireen]

1396. + many

.... and some people are determined to see black or white, while 'reality' is shades of grey.

[The Green Manalishi]

1429. Does the validity of criticism have any correlation with the percentage

of their positive/negative statements/analysis/other comments? Just because a person might post 10 things in a year, and everyone of those posts busts the chops of President Obama and/or the DLC, does not mean that their critiques are de facto less valid than the comment of an enraptured President Obama fan.
FWIW, the argument applies just as much WRT any political orientation, or even art criticism in general.

BTW you can see that I support the President when he's right and express my dismay when he's wrong, it's the POLICY, not the person, that matters IMHO.

[VioletLake]

45. The problem is...

The fight is against an empire, not a political party. Perhaps that wasn't clear enough a few years ago, but it is now.

[JanMichael]

89. Agreed

nt

[roxiejules]

180. Well said...

I think violetlake is correct

[EmeraldCityGrl]

+10

[southmost]

839. yep

+a brazillion

[ThomCat]

862. Within the discussion about the party, that is absolutely

100% true. Our party has become the agents of the empire, corrupted by corporations and corporate money.

The problems here aren't just what we discuss. A lot of the problems are internal to DU.

[readmoreoften]

1169. + 1000000000

Thank you :hugs:

[VioletLake]

1263. hugs back :) nt

[shireen]

1397. +1 good point. nt

[Catherina]

1454. You hit the nail on the head there. Rec'd. n/t

[SoCalDem]

50. I do not envy you your position..

As an almost "charter-member", I feel the angst too. I look forward to your survey, and hope this all can be "fixed".:)

[Blecht]

51. I am one of the lurkers you mention

I used to donate regularly. And I stopped donating because of the sharp turn to the right that has occurred here. I made a conscious decision to stop sending money to a place where union busting, teacher bashing and law-enforcement fellating are so prominently displayed by so many of its members.

But I keep coming back, not to enter into debates with people who have no intention of actually debating anything anyway, but to read. There are so many great writers here whose work we would never see if it weren't for the existence of DU. Skinner's words here have made me think about what we would be losing if DU went away or changed significantly.

I have decided to become a donor again. I urge other lurkers to do the same.

[seabeyond]

70. one can also talk about the pearl clutching bashing, christian bashing....

see the point.

[Blecht]

76. What is pearl clutching bashing?

I have no idea what that means.

[seabeyond]

103. the point is, the bashing is all over. i agree with you there is all that bashing

but it is not necessarily a right bashing. it is a bashing as a whole.

[Ryano42]

54. Donated my usual. Hang in there...

It's my fervent hope that is just "the crazy season of Summer" and with the leaves falling our ranks will quit fighting each other (while continuing to debate respectfully) and close our ranks when the time comes. Remember last Summer? The one before???

Remember: This is EXACTLY what the enemy wants. Diversion. Division. Despair.

We are better than they are...we are better than that.

THANK YOU SKINNER

THANK YOU FOR DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND.

[AC_Mem]

55. I just donated

And I look forward to taking the survey. I hope you will share some of the results so we can see who we are as well.

Thank you for your hard work, I really enjoy this site.

Annette
Patient Democrat

[MadHound]

61. Skinner, it isn't just what is going on here at DU that is effecting donations,

It is what is effecting every non-profit and charity organization in the country; people simply don't have the money. When you're out of work, or in over your head on a mortgage, or picking up the slack for a partner out of work, you have less money to spend elsewhere. Thus, you make your spending priorities, and little "luxuries" like donating to DU go to the wayside.

I'm just saying, it isn't all on you, it isn't all on what is going on here at DU. The real world is taking its toll.

Like so many others, when I get a job, you get some money.

Thanks.

[seabeyond]

72. back to school, economy, escalation of expense of living, stagnent wage, BACK TO SCHOOL, lol

i hear ya.

that is my reason

i. cannot. let. go. of. any. more money.

[deutsey]

106. KPFA, the progressive radio station that started listener-supported radio back in '49,

is also struggling financially.

As you say, it's a sign of the times, unfortunately.

[saltpoint]

64. Skinner, this is the best site out there. On the survey

you plan for next week, be sure to include one segment asking for us to rate this site against other sites on the web. I predict a very strong residual affection and respect for DU among its members.

Also a question or two could focus on how much each of us learns from other members... not just about politics but also books, films, and music. There are Du members who are even more zealous about one or all those three things than about politics.

There's no site like this, and no site looks this good or is as approachable to navigate technically. It's handsome. It's top-drawer.

If you signal us a couple days ahead of the survey I think most of us will be on the watch for it and will respond in kind.

[Monique1]

146. Skinner, I love DU the best place ever.

My money has dwindled within the last 4 yrs. I am retired and was retired comfortably but a stop is on any increase in my SS and Pension plan so any increases are frozen. I know that I my savings have dwindled also because of all the increase in electricity, gas, food, insurance etc., I do plan to donate this weekend for two but the amount will not be the amount I want it to be.

I do have a problem with one thing though - when new people (I believe we call them newbies, my most disliked word) come here they get slammed immediately.
If they have an opinion they are told they are trolls, a person with talking points or totally wrong. We want new people but we need to accept new people and give them a chance. I do believe the moderators do a great job and there is one especially who speaks out for the new people. When that person spoke out for the new person, the moderator was slammed. That is where I have a problem.

I do learn from DU more than you think. KUDOS to DU.

I agree, you should extend the fund raising time at least for another week.

[LynneSin]

65. Perhaps if you had a GD where it's a free for all and one forthose who stay civilized

Although sometimes I have gone there especially since, like you said, we have all the control in DC and lost our focal point of the old republican majority, we no longer are on the same team. And I knew ages ago that if Democrats would ever get control that it would get really rough here in DU because of that.

Homestly, I'm here to support democrats and it pisses me off when I see people suggest that we not vote democrat by either voting independant or god forbid, not voting. But I do recognize that there are plenty of progressives out there do want to have their voice even if they aren't voting democrat for elections.

Why not allow them to have a voice here in DU. Create a forum that is for all progressives where people are welcome to promote 3rd party candidates. Limit it to progressive candidates only - we still should not ever EVER suggest voting republican or not voting. Allow the forum but set it up like the lounge where the greatest stuff can't make the DU home page - there has to be some limits out there.

And honestly, I think some people want agressive debating of the issues - just as long as it doesnt' get violent (ie - you better agree with me or I'll track you down and hurt you) or offensive (ie - you're such a (homophobic/racist/asshole comment here) for not agreeing with me). Let people have their fun again.

As for the recommendation system - I do like it, in fact I love it. Before that system was created, I would see a small group of people who would write anti-democrat threads and then unite together to try and get one of those on the DU home page. Some of those threads were a bit offensive to the rest of us and really didn't reflect the community as a whole. Personally I think the Greatest Page has vastly improved since the new system and I think sometimes people get overdramatic because yes - one or 2 people will from time to time troll in DU and negative rec a great thread. But lets face it - if the post is amazing it will get to the DU home page.

I wish I could give more to DU but since buying my house times are tough. But I did make a donation to help out this fundraiser.

Good luck!

[Boojatta]

117. That's a good idea: "a GD where it's a free for all and one for those who stay civilized"

Of course, even in the free-for-all GD there would be some rules, such as against copyright violations. However, there would be only the most basic rules in the free-for-all GD.

If your idea were implemented, then the workload for the moderators would go down.

[LaurenG]

247. Like a GD =General Discussion and a GDP =General Discussion Pleasant only

humm, that might work, like the old meeting room.

[Subdivisions]

586. SEGREGATE the Progressives???? Are you kidding me?

Let me see if I have this right... Progressives are uncivilized, espouse third-party candidates, and need to be shuffled off to their own room, away from the civilized people? And, to top it all off, you want to eliminate Progressives from having their posts recced, like in the DU 9/11 dungeon?

I'm appalled.

[LynneSin]

1074. Segregate those who want to get nasty and battle it all out

and those who want to keep it civil.

And then perhaps create a group for those who support non-democrat progressive candidates.

[Lilith Velkor]

895. Power concedes nothing without a THREAT.

Voting 3rd party - or not voting - is the way to threaten the party in power if they choose to get all, "Fuck you, your issues are not important, but you better vote for me because you have no other choice."

You'd think the Democratic Party would have fucking learned that by now.

[havocmom]

1378. amusing considering some posts pointing out Crist support here got disappeared

Honest to pete, when posts pointing out clear violation of the DU Prime Directive disappear while those advocating for Crist over the DEMs stayed told me something about how DU operates now that I wish I had never learned.

[BootinUp]

1482. +1

[WI_DEM]

67. I don't mind criticism of the president, but I do see certain people who seem to get away

here with daily assaults on Obama from dubious sources--and who give him credit for nothing and they have done it from day one. They are not constructive--they are not offering constructive criticism because they have intense dislike for Obama--and yet they do it day after day--yes, sometimes their threads or comments are removed but then give it an hour or a day and they are back with the same old thing.

[defendandprotect]

756. Think this is an example of taking posts too personally -- try "ignore" ...

[Jakes Progress]

75. What is wrong with disagreement?

I can't bring myself to go to those nut-job neo-con sites, but I know that one doesn't grow without confronting some disagreement and having to clarify your position and hone a statement if you wish to make a point. Back in the olden days, Democrats argued with each other all the time. Since, as you say, they have the same goals, it is easier to agree on anchor points which makes it possible to discuss methods and finer points of ideology. You can't argue with someone who believes god hates gays or that one race is superior to another; there is no anchoring point to use as an argument.

With the internet and access to millions of sites, people tend to gravitate to sites that reinforce their personal feelings. We just bask in shared self congratulation. Feels good, but doesn't serve any real purpose. I only lurked on DU back in the bush years. What was the need of my voice joining in the taunting and jeering. (I never was a big pep rally fan.)

DU can serve as the half-way house. We can examine our beliefs and positions by testing them against people who, down deep, want the same things for the country but see those things coming another way. We can avoid the drooling idiots and lying assholes from the right wing but still have a place for reflection.

Of course there are the non-reflectors, the Obama-is-evil posters who see no gray and the Obama-is-god posters who brook no disagreement. These posters OP boiler plate flame bait so that they can tit for tat with their enemies who play along. Or they snark about on substantive posts deflecting the point of a well reasoned OP with irrelevant points and off topic wanderings. Just let those time-wasters get the scorn from the body DU that they get. Let the sub threads play out. No one reads them past the first two.

Some may see DU as a vent. I have read many posts that have informed me and helped to shape my thoughts. I have seen posts that ask genuine questions and enjoyed the responses.

Perhaps a nice feature would be a time-out. Once someone replies to a post, there would be a time period - hour or so -before it could be posted. You would have to write the reply, wait an hour, and then re-read your post before you could click to have it posted. It might stop some knee-jerking and it might cut down on the snarks because it would be a pain to come back an hour later to post something that you vented long ago. But it also might make for more careful and considered writing.

If you want new rules, try requiring people to answer for their statements or just stop posting in the thread. A poster could be called on just posting crap without any support. You could have a forum for unsupported drivel where people could vent - call it "The Vent". Thinkers wouldn't go there.

All that said. I'll be sending a check at the end of the month. Pay for say.

[boston bean]

83. The place becomes a complete BORE on days when it's Obama Central.

I think it's great that so many have such a high level of kiss assery, but I do not.

I have been a dem since forever and I'm not going to give up on the principles.

I don't give a shit if Obama's in charge or if Jesus Christ himself was in charge.

Many Many Many more people who are critical of Obama have been tombstoned than the other way around.

An environment has been created where you have to watch what you say.

And it SUCKS.

You wanted honesty, there is some honesty for you.

[geek tragedy]

113. Well, it is a Democratic website. So, on substance one

should be more likely to get banned for posting anti-Democrat stuff than for posting pro-Democrat stuff. Personal attacks etc should be dealt with neutrally.

[boston bean]

125. What is anti democratic about want single payer. What is anti democratic about wanting to

protect social security?

Is it anti democratic because obama is president?

You ought to think about what that means buddy.

And you and all your little friends swarming threads, telling people to shut up, ganging up, alerting, screaming yelling and kicking because someone points out how UN democratic the Democratic Party and the Admin is, is nothing but a JOKE! It is what is killing DU.

I care more about the DEMOCRATIC ISSUES.

[geek tragedy]

131. Are you really suggesting people have been banned for

expressing a policy preference for single payer?

[boston bean]

136. I'll express whatever the hell i want.

YES, people who believed strongly in single payer have been banned.

[BzaDem]

143. Way to avoid the question.

The question was not whether people who happened to support single payer have been banned (for other reasons).

The question was, has anyone ever been banned FOR supporting single payer. I.e., was their support for single payer the REASON for being banned?

[boston bean]

150. People like you got them banned by saying they were anti Obama.

and alerting, and kicking and screaming and ganging up.

So Yes, they were banned for wanting single payer.

A bit disingenuous you, huh?

[BzaDem]

174. I have never tried to get anyone banned.

Heck, I rarely alert any posts.

And I have never seen anyone banned because they wanted single payer. The vast majority of the board wants single payer.

[boston bean]

220. Good then. What's your problem with me then?

We agree.

[BzaDem]

227. I don't have a problem with you. I simply pointed out that people are not banned for supporting

single payer.

[boston bean]

235. YaY!

because i never said it either. read more carefully......

[WI_DEM]

179. Why are you trying to pick fights in this thread?

but don't go around saying that Obama supporters have gotten people banned from here or that this place is "boring" when it's "Obama Central" which it very rarely is.

[boston bean]

225. it is boring to sit and read how wonderful it is under obama, when I think a lot of it sucks!

And yes, I have been ganged up upon and told to shut up.

I'll take you at your word for it, but just cause you aren't alerting doesn't mean it isn't happening.

There have been way too many tombstones to try and deny it.

[Gman]

353. Then I think you need to go somewhere else where you'll be happier

[Subdivisions]

Fuck that shit! Who the fuck are you to tell someone they'll be happier

somewhere else? You're part of the fucking problem! Why don't YOU leave?

[Gman]

637. Sorry... I was here first!

The lady sounds pretty unhappy. She'd probably be happier elsewhere.

[MissDeeds]

887. "I was here first"?

How old are you? Besides, "The lady" has as much right to be here as you do - perhaps more since you broke a DU rule about suggesting another poster go elsewhere.

:eyes:

[Gman]

1575. LOL!

[w4rma]

1199. I agree with you, Mr. Bean. There are big problems and some would rather cheerleader than take them

on.

[Bobbie Jo]

252. This kind of crap

is the root of the problem, imo....

Prime example.

[boston bean]

261. feeling is mutual.

What would make it ok for you to say that my words are crap, but yours aren't?

And that I am a problem, but you are not?

[Bobbie Jo]

299. For one thing....

You're all over this thread picking fights. This is exactly the kind of behavior that discourages people from posting and ultimately supporting this site.

[boston bean]

307. I have mostly responded to replies to my reply.

I had a conversation with another.

Does that put me "all over this thread picking fights"?

[Bobbie Jo]

320. Yes.

[Subdivisions]

605. Yep, troublemakers. n/t

[DevonRex]

201. But not for simply saying so. I believe strongly in single payer as well.

And I won't be banned for saying so.

[boston bean]

229. People have been banned for criticizing Obama over it.

You know it's true. You know it.

[dionysus]

281. now now, don't get in the way of a blossoming tantrum! sit back, have a truffle or two, and enjoy it

:D

[DevonRex]

287. You have no idea

what you just did to my keyboard.

[tridim]

260. I believe strongly in single payer and I'm not banned.

What are you talking about?

[dionysus]

277. they were banned for not being able to be civil, not for supporting single payer.

[Name removed]

391. Deleted message

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

[dionysus]

399. wow, does this mean we're not buddies?

:(

[DevonRex]

198. I'd like single payer. You would, too, right, geek tragedy?

I'm pretty sure we won't be banned for saying so, too.

[boston bean]

231. Say obama's a corporatist for doing what he did, when he had the will of the people on

his side to push for something much bolder than mandate giving billions more to insurance companies.

[DevonRex]

270. I don't believe that, so I won't say it. But Skinner has said that's allowed.

So, say it in that nice a way, without breaking the rules and you won't be banned. Pretty simple.

[boston bean]

321. So we are back to what I originally posted. You have to watch what you say. nt

[dionysus]

331. yes sherlock. on a private board for democrats, you can't slander them. the concept is quite simple.

there's plenty of places one can go and crap on democrats all they want. it's up to skinner how far he let's that go on HIS site.

[boston bean]

342. What was the slander? you think calling Obama a corporatist is slander?

Do you alert on such writings?

[dionysus]

sometimes.

[DevonRex]

195. But YOU are the one who just turned this discussion into a group attack.

Just sayin'.

[boston bean]

233. I'm not going to deny there are two distinct groups here.

I have my place. I know where I stand.

And I have given my honest opinion.

You have chosen to have further discussion with me.

[DevonRex]

272. I guess I just wonder why you attacked so quickly, is all. nt

[boston bean]

318. What you call an "attack" isn't an attack at all. it's an opinion.

A well founded one, i believe, but an opinion none the less.

[DevonRex]

326. Discussion is over after reading what you've said to Roy below. nt

[dionysus]

328. when you bust out "you and all your little friends" straight away, it's an insult, and you know it.

:shrug:

[boston bean]

332. Skinner recognizes there are two groups on DU. What is wrong with me

agreeing. Like I said, I know where I stand.

[dionysus]

275. "you and all your little friends"... ROFL.

[Beetwasher]

398. And Your Little Dog Too!

:rofl:

[Arkana]

888. No one said either of those things are anti-democratic.

Nice little strawman there though. Gotta play the victim, right?

[Touchdown]

1677. I counted 11 "little friends" swarming you.

Kinda made your point for you, didn't they?

[defendandprotect]

760. If we are all fighting against government being moved to the RIGHT ....

then the labels you're using are meaningless --

unless you're ignoring the fact that we have infiltration of the Democratic

Party by corporations?

[liberalmike27]

120. Yea It Depends

If you are critical that Obama is being too much of a DINO, then it should be OK. If you are too critical of him not giving tax breaks to the rich, or not promoting enough hating, or you know, right-wing stuff, "See-ya, yer out!!"

You just have to realize that if you view the political spectrum as a continuum, a number line of sorts, then we've been moving to the right for let's say 60 years or so, and radically right for 30 years now, since Reagan. So what that leaves is this huge range of thought from the extreme left, all the way to just to the left of Republican Fascist types. Just look at Crist, or Webb for instance. If they aren't insane enough to be republicans, and don't make a mistake, it does take a nut to stay republican these days, then they drop off and are in our party. So that makes the "RANGE" of people who have to hold massive, compared to this small, cookie-cutter republican tea-party type.

This is, of course, a good thing if you'll just let us talk. It makes us a much larger group, but the down-side is we're going to disagree. Allow us to do that. Try really, really, really hard to not delete posts unless they are obviously right-wing. And we'll never move democrats to the left unless you allow us to be critical of their far too centrist state.

[Lisa0825]

133. I can't recall any day it has been "Obama Central" since around the inauguration. nt

[boston bean]

142. Really? Look into every thread. You shall see it here in this thread.

Have you ever entered GDP?

[Whisp]

168. because this is not Repuglican Underground

why is that so difficult for some to comprehend?

[boston bean]

242. Not difficult to comprehend. But one may think it is the way certain policies are defended on this

site.

[defendandprotect]

768. Nor should it be corporate underground . . . we are all fighting against the right, aren't we?

[Lisa0825]

173. Yeah, and I see lots of positive AND negative posts everyday. nt

[jeff47]

956. It doesn't occur to you that you're part of the problem, does it?

Take a look over all of your responses in this sub-thread. You're constantly attacking anyone, including people just asking for clarification.

We're not out to get you. You can disagree without being disagreeable, and all that other new-agey claptrap.

More to the point, you'll get much more support if you're not beating on the people already closest to your political positions. And if you actually want to change the world, you need support for your views.

'Course if you just want to bitch and moan, have at it. But don't be surprised when you can't have a remotely pleasant discussion.

[AsahinaKimi]

87. OH hell...

I am going to donate again!! :rofl:

I wuv you guys!
:grouphug:

[dembotoz]

88. perhap restructure the fundraiser as opposed to the site

damn i am broke right now but later in sept....

[EnlightenedOne]

92. Beautiful Post

I've been at DU since 2001 (under another name), when Bush was selected and I knew in my gut the country was going to be in serious trouble. I knew there would be at least 1 war (who knew 2?), and that our Treasury would be raided. I was desperate to find a place of like-minded people - and luckily I found this site. As soon as I joined back then, I was labeled a "freeper" when I didn't even know what that was, but was not deterred. I rarely post, but the first thing I do every morning when I get to work - is to check DU - you get all the news and happenings here without having to check out multiple sites. I'm lucky enough to still have a job and don't want to lose it and its very important to me to continue to support DU. For now, I'm putting my money only on the things that matter to me. Obama, most democrats in general (Republicans have proven to be useless do-nothing liars and obstructer's) Rob Miller for Congress (to punish Joe Wilson for his 'you lie' comment), Alan Grayson, and another non-political website whose take on all things spiritual has opened my eyes.

I wouldn't want us to be like the R's who supported and support their party no matter what, while they lie to start a war with obvious conflicts of interest, and hurried to work destroying our Constitution as quickly as they could (thanks to the terror attack which they ignored) and even began torture! Bush is what destroyed America and we will be feeling the effects for many more years to come, unfortunately. Its fine to criticize Obama and to want and expect more, but I can't stand the seemingly hatred of him from Democrats. Hate is destructive and serves no purpose. Obama has asked for criticism, he's asked us to bitch (that's what democracy is about) - he knows he's not perfect and he knows there is no way to please everyone, but I know again, in my gut - that Obama knows what he is doing, and knows where he wants to take the country, but he's got mighty forces to contend with especially since the country was sold out to the special interest before he walked in the door. He's treading lightly, but in the right direction. Things can continue to be improved upon. Obama is not the enemy and I feel fortunate every day that he has taken on the enormous challenge to steer America back from the brink into the correction. I just wish DU'ers could give him the benefit of the doubt and work WITH him to achieve their goals, but I realize that's probably never going to happen. So when I read the posts, I just generally ignore and skip over the hate. Don't want to invite it into my life. But we have to be the change we want to see. And when we get that, we'll all be alot better off. To me, DU is irreplaceable.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

188. I'm with you, EnlightenedOne

Personally, I tend to respond to misogyny when I see it here, but otherwise, I've come to pretty much pass by the wailing and gnashing of teeth; getting caught up in that puts me in a frame of mind I don't want. The "Oh God! We're Doomed" threads and the excessive rage against Obama and unrealistic impatience with the process of change. I don't want to spiral down into that, so I come here much less.

As for possible reasons for the donations downturn as the reason for the donations downturn, I'm really resonating with your post as well as the posts mentioning $$ -- personally, I'm picking up the slack for an out of work loved one, as well as dealing with people I've been helping who would take advantage of my good nature, as someone else upthread mentioned, and so I'm feeling much more pinched and cautious with my generosity.

Just curious, too--about the spiritual website you mentioned. I like that subject.

[EnlightenedOne]

297. Thanks Blanche

The hate/negativity is what "they" want and it will eat you up alive and cause "dis-ease", so who needs it. I'm very much at peace with where we are as awhole, the worst is over, Bush is gone.

You definitely need an open mind, because it will blow your mind - but please feel free to check it out:

http://www.hiddenmeanings.com/

[Hell Hath No Fury]

681. What was your other name?

I am alway curious when an old DU resurfaces. :hi:

[YvonneCa]

860. GREAT post. I agree. n/t

[Soylent Brice]

94. seriously, a lot of people are just broke.

if people are not donating as some sign of protest because they're not "inheriting" DU, well that's just plain fucking childish.

i, as i'm sure there are many others here, don't have a side.

believe it or not there are THREE sides here:

1. the president can do no wrong crowd

2. the president can do no right crowd

3. we hope the president does the right thing, we remain hopeful, but are disappointed at times with certain policies, and still want him to succeed crowd.

group number 3 is by far the largest i would presume.
the loudest are always heard the most, but it doesn't always mean they're the majority.

thanks for all you do. i'm not going anywhere.

[Bluerthanblue]

97. it isn't about "what DU has become" for me Skinner, DU is

still the very best site I've ever encountered on the web for discussing and learning about all kinds of things. It's more that money is tighter than ever for me these days.

I'm grateful that DU exists- and I respect and admire the way you and the other administrators have managed to keep us together through all the stuff that has gone on over the years. The problems and frustrations I've had at DU over the years have almost never been with the moderation or 'oversight' of this place, but with attitudes or perspectives of fellow posters- something that is just a natural part of life in this world. I think you folks have done an outstanding job running and maintaining this community.

Thank YOU- and all the people who give their time and energy to keep DU happening.

we've been through a lot over the years- I'm believing we'll get through these strange days too.

:grouphug:

blu

[malaise]

98. I know it's hard work running an MB with so many different

interests and I think that overall you and our Mods do a decent job.
While I don't care who recs or unrecs my threads, I think there is a legitimate complaint from DUers who keep the board running that persons who do not contribute can rec or unrec threads and I think you may want to think about changing this feature.

It is true that sometimes persons who have been here for years do not have the money to contribute, but that can be resolved by using years of membership. A person who has been a member for two years or less should not be allowed to rec/unrec if they are not donating to the Board.

I certainly don't withhold contributions because I disagree with the way the board is run. I send one contribution (in time for the Valentine's fundraiser) to cover the year because I'd rather not split it up and end up paying more for bank drafts than I contribute to DU.

[Boojatta]

202. Good post!

The once-a-year approach to giving sounds sensible to me. Didn't the banks already get a bailout?

Donating is like paying income taxes, but less expensive. :)

[T Wolf]

101. What has happened to DU is NOT THE FAULT of the site, but of those who come here.

No matter how "strange" the exchanges between/among us has become, it still is a great source for information and leads to more information that we need to continue to fight for "progressive ideals" against the enemy - even when that enemy is ourselves.

[NNN0LHI]

107. I usually hate your new ideas at first Skinner

But then after a while I begin to like them.

I've learned to trust your judgment on this kind of stuff. Go for it.

Don

[Boojatta]

207. "I usually hate your new ideas at first Skinner"

But then after a while I begin to like them.

You have just described the symptoms of the Stockholm Syndrome.

:evilgrin:

[metapunditedgy]

108. The problem is not competing groups, it's competing *ideals*.

A lot of energy comes from the people who want to see continual change and improvement. Partisan politics (even if it's in favor of the more-liberal, Democratic side of politics) is *not* going to provide that inspiration. But the "change" side of the community is not always going to follow Democratic politicians.

It's a fundamental conflict, not a personality conflict. I don't see how you can choose both.

I don't see *why* you need to choose between the two, frankly.

The more you enforce purity on either side of the spectrum, the more bland the community will become.

Here's another problem: the more you tell an idealist to be quiet, the louder they will get.

[KittyWampus]

121. Actually, most of us share the same "ideals". But keeping your eyes to the stars

means you'll eventually not notice when you approach a cliff.

I am an Idealist. I seldom get negative and prefer to constantly seek out the next step forward.

No, if you were going to draw some sort of philosophical line it's Idealists and Cynics.

I think you mistake being a Cynic for being Idealistic.

Cynics HATE progress and do everything they can to downplay/ignore it when it happens.

[boston bean]

159. Oh, so we've moved from being idealist purists to cynics?

Good GAWD!

[metapunditedgy]

402. Cast it as "good guys" vs. "bad guys" if you want, but I'm saying that you simply can't

1) make people form a lively, vibrant, spirited community and
2) simultaneously apply increasing pressure to keep "on-message."

Gotta pick one or the other.

Personally, I like a vibrant, lively big tent. I have no objection to interacting with people who think differently than I do, and I don't see why anyone else would either.

If you want to have rules, keep it simple: "Be nice to one another."

If you want to split people into groups and tell some groups they're not welcome, then things will go badly.

[readmoreoften]

1110. Nope. I don't think we share the same ideals.

There are posters on this board who support privatization of the military, the school system, who support union busting, are anti-immigrant, and pro-war. The old left had a word for people who professionally compromised on issues while "allies" gained power and raked in the profits. Those people were called Opportunists. There is a not-so-thin line where opportunists become identical to the profiteers they support.

[ohheckyeah]

111. For some of us, it is simply a matter of economics.

I have no gripe with how DU is being run, I'm just out of a job.

The one thing I have found on every single message board I've been on is people love drama. Don't let the drama get you down. Keep doing the best you can and that's all you can do. No matter what you do somebody isn't going to be happy....why? Because this is the Internet and that's the way people roll.

[Prism]

112. The solution is simple - enforce your own stated rules.

I'm not sure why you guys have never bother to do this - and you don't, not in the slightest. Instead you cast about for complicated, unseen, unknown problems and circumstances, anything to work around the simple fact that you don't seem inclined to hold everyone on the site to the same standards.

Remember, not all that long ago, you made a rather lengthy post about civility and how moderators would be enforcing it more vigorously? What happened to that? It never came to pass. In fact, the site has grown worse over the time. Dozens of personal attacks can be leveled by a single poster in a single day, and they come back again and again, day after day, immune to consequences or any real standards at all for reasons that remain murky at best.

Creating a higher level partisan board? Lemme tell you, the partisan groups have made it worse. The Barack Obama Group has created a veritable West Side Story on DU, and I don't think the solution is to ramp that kind of separation and partisanship to ever higher levels. The protected groups are a failure. They've sowed division and rancor, they've pulled the mods into clear positions of biased enforcement, and they've aggravated disagreements to an absurd degree.

What is so difficult about unbiased enforcement? You know, people do notice that you tend to pick moderators with a fairly one-sided mode of behavior on DU. People see posters screaming epithets all day long while completely bullet proof because the mods are known to sympathize with them before they were made mods. People see this shit. But let's pretend why morale is down is a total mystery.

And how is the stake being driven through DU's heart? The admins. You, Skinner. You're doing it. Have you seen what this place is like for minorities? The LGBT community's treatment here is totally crazy, and that's a top-down attitude, straight from your behavior towards LGBTers when you purged so many of them from the board. You sit back with "reasonable people can disagree" as all kinds of crazy, homophobic, sexist, racist nonsense goes flying, alienating all kinds of people from this place and making them feel distinctly unwelcome.

I feel unwelcome here solely because I'm a gay man. As an LGBT individual, I find large swaths of this board absolutely hostile to my community. I find your moderators and your purges hostile to me and my community. You will not own up to it, admit it, or apologize for it.

And that's your doing. All you.

But you want to pretend there are other, unseen issues, because dealing with the actual problems would require owning up to the fact that your own biases and partisan desires allowed the moderation of this forum go straight into the sewer.

Pile on more rules that won't be enforced? Definition of insanity and all that. Try enforcing the already existing rules, unbiased, nonpartisan, without showing any kind of deference or favoritism of viewpoint. This place would get cleaned up real, real fast.

We've got posters who run around with every other word out of their mouth being fuck, and they just go on and on, meanwhile thoughtful liberals have been blasted out of here without a word, a warning, or an explanation.

But the problems here are a total mystery. Except, you know, they're not in the slightest.

[LostinVA]

+1

And I have things to do, so y'all enjoy the rest of the "discussion."

[Boojatta]

140. Posting that required courage.

How would you feel about a forum for discussing any given enforcement action or enforcement inaction?

[Desertrose]

369. More discussion...............

I don't think this would help...more flames, blame & then what?

[Change has come]

262. + 7

[Desertrose]

362. Excellent summation of things, Prism.

Thank you for posting this....I have to say I agree.
:hug:

[G_j]

394. that's the way it 'feels' to me

being here in fits and spurts, it does seem that the rule enforcement does not happen equally across the board. I also wish that every TS would be accompanied by an explanation.

[Yuugal]

421. +7

[CBR]

474. "The Barack Obama Group has created a veritable West Side Story on DU..."

BOG is not even really active. There are three threads started today with like 10 replies in total. It is like you are fighting a bogeyman that does not exist.

[dionysus]

498. it's clear that "obama supporter" are their clear enemy. it's actually hillarious.

[LostinVA]

870. IR

[CreekDog]

671. when i posted a thread about losing our liberalness and diversity at DU it was locked

it had a ton of recommends.

within 48 hours, a screed inviting people to leave was posted against, i would argue, my thread.

it was never locked. my OP was restrained, most of the responses thoughtful --mine was locked.

the responding OP was unrestrained, it was an attack, it spawned fights --it was not locked.

i complained --it did not matter.

[ThomCat]

703. That has been the norm of "unbiased" moderation here for quite a while.

There has been a blatant double standard. Attacks against certain groups, and certain people are acceptable. Even encouraged. Especially if they come from certain people.

But any defense is considered an attack. Any response is suspect. Standards of moderation are blatantly different for the two sides, and the two groups.

The idea that there DU does not allow, condone or approve of bias is laughable when it comes from the people enforcing the rules.

There is no transparency or accountability when the problem comes from above. All we get is repeatedly hammered into silence.

[ThomCat]

680. A fish stinks from the head.

+1

[Hell Hath No Fury]

694. Thank for for stating that plainly --

it took courage and told a whole lotta Truth. :hi:

[jane_pippin]

709. This times a billion.

Haven't logged in here in months and months (largely due to the issues you mention), but I had to give this a huge thumbs up. Well stated.

[Ignis]

805. +666 -- No point in starting my own post, this sums it up.

The bias in moderation is obvious to those who are not blinded by their own.

[Duncan Grant]

+7

This is exactly why I've stopped donating to DU. I rarely post here - but when I do, it's almost always to the GLBT forum.

As a former moderator and long-term member, I did everything I could to improve this place for LGBT people. To no avail.

Skinner, EarlG and the moderators failed the LGBT community on DU. We were systematically attacked for months on end, and when we asked Admin to be our allies and supporters -- they abandoned us in favor of "the broader interests of the larger DU community". (Sound familiar?) And LGBT people are passively harassed all over these forums to this very day.

"Nest of vipers" mean anything to anyone? That's the characterization of LGBT people at DU which was supported by Admin and the moderators. There are posts mocking the LGBT forum and its members still standing in another forum on DU. How about the time the "Best of DU" threads were arbitrarily locked in the LGBT forum? How about the purges of gay members? And the list goes on and on (details available upon request).

You guys owe DU's LGBT community an amends. Big time. No one with any self-respect would invite their LGBT friends to post here (unless they have some very sentimental ideas about social and economic justice for LGBT people).

Finally, to be very clear, this post is about Admin and the moderators only -- and their years long neglect of the LGBT community, not the members who continue to ally with LGBT people.

[Catherina]

874. +1. Finally someone tells the truth. Thank you. For every single word. n/t

[Lucian]

911. + infinity

Those are the reasons why I don't post much here anymore. And you summed it up nicely.

:thumbsup:

[Starry Messenger]

936. +100,000

:thumbsup:

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

938. +1

Creating a higher level partisan board would simply exacerbate the problem to an incredible level.

[pecwae]

1010. Unbiased enforcement is the key.

The troubles here are totally non-mysterious. Rule enforcement needs to be consistent, unbiased, performed in a timely manner and must apply to all members, donating, non donating and special groups.

[bobbolink]

1099. VERY well said! Just one thing....

please don't forget to add the CLASS issue to the others that are ignored, and suffer bias on DU.

Because we definitely do. Maybe because we don't have the money to support the place?

In the end, we are all in this together, we really are, but we are sll so factionalized... all of our causes keep separate and isolated, and that is working against us.

We will all be stronger if we can FINALLY come together, all of us "small people"!

[Prism]

1188. The treatment of the poor is appalling

I'm beginning to have trouble separating the welfare queen vitriol of the 80s with many of the arguments made on DU every single day.

There is nothing vague about the notion that whatever is done to the least among us is done to us all. Solidarity.

[bobbolink]

1197. Your words are excellent, and yes, the 80s vitriol is now everyday DU.

It hurts, and it hurts deeply. (I guess I shouldn't admit that.. I think that is what they want.)

I just wanted to remind you to include us with the groups needing support and attention. We usually get left out, and it not only hurts, but is keeping us further down.

I hear you got the message, and I appreciate that.

Until blacks support gays, and gays support poor folk, and poor folk support the oppressed people in other parts of the world and we all support the native peoples of this country, we will continue to fare much more poorly than is necessary.

It is finally time to come together. Are we mature enough to do so?

[Prism]

1220. Homelessness and LGBT rights are inextricably linked

Most of my volunteering hours are spent working with shelters for LGBT youth. LGBT youth are affected by the callous attitudes that permeate society's general attitudes toward the poor - they don't count, who cares about them, they're on their own. They're cast off, unsightly, unwanted, unloved, and best ignored.

That attitude is an American problem that affects every struggling American no matter what their identity. It is the attitude that enables our government to worry about Wall Street first and foremost, with the scant crumbs left over flicked off the table at the hungry below.

Anyone who dismisses an individual from society because of their social station, class, or identity is not my friend nor my ally.

Poverty and outcasts are allowed in this country because we allow them, because we don't want to see what we've done, because we do not want to acknowledge how our actions and our willful blindness allow these conditions to go on and on.

We treat lives as if they're pieces in a partisan political game.

That is how cheap we've allowed lives to become.

[bobbolink]

1228. I absolutely agree, and that is why I can't understand why gays have not become active

in the homelessness issue.

It puzzles me no end.

As a matter of fact, a woman I know locally has a brother who works with HIV patients, and was telling her that a patient of his was so desperate that he went and bought a gun... no ammo, just the gun.... and walked into a 711 with the purpose of getting arrested so he would have a place to sleep, food to eat, and medical attention.

Now, if that isn't the kind of desperation that should bring the two issues together, I don't know what would do it. But I get nowhere with it.

If you can help with this in any way, it would be terrific, and I would be most grateful!

:yourock:

Yes, WE ALLOW IT, and it is time to own up to that, and be mature people who live up the labels of "progressive" and/or "liberal"!!

[Prism]

1474. I think it's partially a protective mechanism, partially the diversity

Until relatively recently in American culture, the LGBT community has been under siege from all quarters. Heck, to this day we have to fight with Democrats over whether or not our lives and issues have intrinsic value enough to be addressed directly and vigorously.

From the AIDS epidemic, to hate crimes, to youth homelessness, to the right-wing, a large part of the LBGT community seems to be in a perpetual defensive crouch. This leads to a kind of "take care of our own" mindset. It's us against the world. For me, it's a natural flow from my own life and experiences. It's about the desire for those LGBTers who come after us to have it easier than we did. It's part of clearing the way to progress. It works, but it can be somewhat myopic in scope.

But I think what really prohibits us from making the alliances we should is that we're not much of a monolith as a community. We have LGBT issues in common, but we also have about a quarter of us voting for Republicans. And that's with Republicans openly hostile to our equality. How would those numbers break down if you removed the gay question from the equation. Would 75% of LGBTers still self-identify as liberal/progressive? We're our own little cat herd.

But I do think we're making progress in forging alliances and realizing how our issues intersect with the larger progressive direction (or lack thereof) of the country. In being outcasts, I think a lot of LGBTers are finding in their increased acceptance in society an increased sense of responsibility in realizing that we're not alone, it's not only us who are scapegoated, marginalized, and discriminated against. When you're the underdog, you see the other underdogs and your sympathies naturally lay with them.

Just gotta keep pushing for it, and hopefully we'll get there together.

[bobbolink]

1598. I agree..... there is a time in the life of an oppressed group when it is imperative

to pull apart and define their group identity. EVERY group must do this, so you have absolutely no argument from me on that. In fact, I cheer this process, which is hard and painful, but necessary.

Although, I will say that during my dirtyhippiecommiepinkobum days in Berkeley, we all did attend each others rallies, and support each others causes. It was natural, it wasn't something we debated, we just knew it was important.

The problem is that now most groups have done this..... blacks, Indians, gays, feminists, etc., and the time has come to forge alliances. First, because it is important to our own growth to do so. It is too easy to become to centered on ourselves, and lose sight of how we fit and belong to a larger group. That is never healthy.

While we have our differences, oppression is oppression and our commonalities are as important as our differences.

Second, because our separateness makes us weaker, and the power structure wants it that way.

[Spheric]

1113. +7

[readmoreoften]

1145. Yes, the LGBT purge during the campaign season was cynical.

And I do miss many of the LGBT posters who were lost. I've found that those hostile to LGBT people on DU have a new tactic now, one that is harder to fight, this instance and uprecc'ing of threads that claim Obama to have made some radical pro-gay move (usually completely inconsequential nothingness) in the middle of his continuation of antigay policies. These threads are usually followed by snarky OH I THOUGHT OBAMA WAS A HOMOPHOBE etc.

As if we don't know what our own rights are and who are allies are. I'm pretty sure that some of these people aren't "anti-gay" in the "I could care less if the homos get their marriage" kind of way. They are very gay-baiting and very insincere, and in the end, they're antagonistic to our well-being.

[paulk]

1147. bingo

:thumbsup:

[awoke_in_2003]

1174. and some can threaten...

physical harm on another member, get banned, then get let right back in because they are a good writer.

[Prism]

1185. Or say people shouldn't get special privileges based on what they shove into their rectums.

The same person you're referencing also once said that quite openly and proudly.

Yep. Violent, abusive homophobes are welcome.

LGBTers who did nothing wrong? Not so much, not so much.

But no, seriously, it's completely unfathomable about why people may be less than happy with the moderation here. I think we should form a committee to sniff out the frustrating elusive truth about how DU took a turn for the worse.

And, heh, that last point is highly debatable. Some people believe volume and quality are synonymous.

[awoke_in_2003]

1302. To be fair...

the ones I saw removed were because they had a history of ganging up and abusing people that were not in their clique. Were some of these LGBT'ers, yes- but there was no "Great Gay Purge" here. They were abusive, the person I am referencing was also abusive. They broke the rules, and the rules should apply equally. It does make me mad that, in one case, some are more equal than others (Animal Farm reference, just in case you don't get that one). :hi:

on edit: "The same person you're referencing also once said that quite openly and proudly"- I have no doubt about your statement- a bully is a bully (especially when drinking)

[Foo Fighter]

1394. "I think we should form a committee to sniff out the frustrating elusive truth

about how DU took a turn for the worse."

No committee needed.

As always, follow the money.

[Mimosa]

1236. That bugs me BIG TIME

That isn't right.

But I contributed before I read your post, Awoke. I'm sort of sorry about it. I always ignore that person's topics.

[gkhouston]

1304. There's a lot of truth in this. I see some of the same people going around

baiting and berating others month after month in a manner that shouldn't be tolerated, yet they're still around.

You want a cleaner pool? Use a skimmer.

[carolinayellowdog]

1322. Here since 2002 and agree wholeheartedly

the relentless right vs. left harassment made me an ex-donor several years ago, and has made even lurking increasingly painful since then

[leftstreet]

1402. Wow, I've never seen a thread this long on DU that wasn't about Chavez

:beer:

[laughingliberal]

1420. +1000 nt

[carolinayellowdog]

1499. this is the one that speaks for me

Best diagnosis of the trouble as I see it. An ignore list is no help when those who populate it disrupt multiple threads hourly.

[terrya]

1513. +1. Hell, plus +10,000, if I could.

I want to add a comment if I may.

You mentioned the attitudes towards minorities here. You brought up "reasonable people can disagree". That, to me, was a defining moment for me, as a gay man, here on DU. It said, to me, that enforcement of rules targeting homophobia, racism, sexism will never really seriously be enforced. And "reasonable people can disagree" was straight from the top.

I've always felt there was a huge amount of hostility towards LGBT people here. The "poutrage" crap when we've gotten angry about various insults, slights, to our community and we expressed our anger. It's just insultingly stupid. Particularly on a message board that is advertised as progressive.

Admittedly, I've posted here a few times recently. And you know...it wasn't a good idea. Nothing has really changed here. And I feel guilty at all of the good people I've come to know who have gotten tombstoned because of some of the stupid crap that is allowed to go on here.

I've read your posts, prism, and you are such a good guy. Always thoughtful, always worthwhile to read. I'm not to going add any thing further to your excellent post. Except thank you.

[nashville_brook]

1552. appoint a DIVERSE and REPRESENTATIVE collection of mods.

use a TAP system where people are NOMINATED from the their constituent groups. otherwise you risk getting people who self-select for liking to wear a badge.

same as what we expect from our government at large. lets have LGBT, Women, people of color, and people representing their interest groups.

mods are essentially judges, and in terms of existing on a discussion board the have the power of summary EXECUTION. that's pretty powerful, and from the looks of the response to just this post, that power has been abused.

as a "democratic" group, shouldn't we adhere to the basic democratic principle of fair representation?

[RoyGBiv]

115. Okay ...

I've tried to talk, Skinner.

For the past year, I've been ignored. Maybe I'm not so smart, and maybe you're correct in ignoring me and those who have expressed the same opinion I have. However, I think were that the case, you wouldn't find it necessary to post this message.

At one time I actively tried to solicit donations for you. I ran contests. I donated for myself and randomly for others. For a brief period when my income was stable, I offered a regular donation. It wasn't huge, but it was regular. But then I started being insulted and belittled by people who found some fault in me supporting a Democratic President. And just spare me, people. I don't want to hear your idiotic rantings about so-called censorship or speaking truth to power or what-the-hell-ever. We're all adults here, and we know what we're talking about. We know what the problem is even if our need to be politically correct prevents us from saying it openly. When this place turned into the anti-Democratic Underground, I stopped caring.

I once loved this place, Skinner. I once defended it and you against all critics. I can no longer do that, even though I think you personally are a good person with a good heart. I simply feel you have lost sight of your goal and have failed to accept good advice when it has been given in an overly deferential attempt to appear fair.

Many of us have moved on. This is my first post in about a month and will likely be my last post for many more. Unless things change, dramatically, when my donation period expires, I will be gone entirely. That's not a threat. I don't do threats. I'm just explaining the realities.

I wish it were different. I respect you personally a lot. I do not respect the majority of the people who have taken over this place.

Sorry.

[boston bean]

134. Discuss the issues sir, and leave the man (obama) out of it and let's see what you come up with.

[RoyGBiv]

161. What?

Do you have a point? If so, what is it?

[boston bean]

172. Discuss the issues. Stop making it about Democratic Party Loyalty.

People who are discussing issues are not republicans or right wingers.

The way a conversation ends with someone of your caliber is usually this way:

Alerting, because the person isn't supporting Obama's policy. Therefore they are not a Democrat.

It's a good laugh if it the tactic hadn't succeeded in driving good people off the board.

Now, you can have the playground all to yourself. You will have made the place the most boring site to visit on the web.

We can all gaze into the eyes of Obama and know all is well.

[RoyGBiv]

197. Yeahokay ...

My comments were to Skinner. If he chooses not to respond, that's fine. That's standard. He gets too much of this as it is, and I fully understand the "correct" answer is evasive for someone in his position.

You're just trying to initiate another iteration of the standard argument, and I have no interest. I mean what I said. I haven't posted here in a month. I haven't even read posts at this place outside a few sub-forums in a month. I only saw this post from Skinner because one of the many websites that have sprung up as alternative meeting places for those accustomed to this place had a link to it, and I felt it was worth addressing.

I'm not engaging in the standard argument you want me to follow. I truly do not care about it anymore. This place and that argument do not genuinely matter in the grand scheme of things.

[boston bean]

204. Well, you have withdrawn, what difference would it make now.

I'm here trying to honestly give my opinion.

You on the other hand are letting us know why you've already decided to leave.

pfffftttt.

skinners not the only one who can read your post btw, they aren't invisible to everyone else.

[RoyGBiv]

219. Once again ...

Do you have a point you'd like to raise with me beyond what I said?

What you say is mostly correct but meaningless. Sure, you can respond to anything I might say to Skinner, but if you expect any reply outside the context of a conversation with Skinner, I admit I do not understand why.

Skinner may or may not reply to me. Doesn't matter. Matters even less whether you or anyone else does.

The point, Boston Bean, is that I'm not here to argue, debate, or discuss things with you or anyone else. That is in fact a part of me not caring about this place anymore. Skinner wanted to talk. So, I talked. If he chooses not to engage me that's his prerogative, but you're irrelevant to that.

[boston bean]

245. Skinner, Skinner, please respond to RoyGBiv. He is only here to talk to you. nt

[dionysus]

291. wow, what the hell is your problem?

[DevonRex]

309. Now you're just being mean. You have no clue what's going on here. None.

That's a real person you're talking to. And that's all I'm gonna say about that.

[RoyGBiv]

341. Here's your problem, Skinner ...

... in a nutshell.

This person seems to want to pick a fight with me because she doesn't like the way I expressed things and so has chosen to try to belittle me since I won't engage in that fight.

It's junior high here, not even high school. Am I really supposed to care about this to the point I give you money for it?

I know you're trying, Skinner. I do. But you've got to make some hard decisions and stand by them. What do you want this place to be?

Maybe I and people like me need to be banned. That would give you one thing. Banning a certain group of others would give you another. Or, you can let things continue as they are with cosmetic changes that don't actually amount to much, which is what's been done for years as things have progressively degenerated.

I'll shut up now. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this is what happens when a person offers a genuine opinion and someone else comes along trying to bait that person into a different kind of discussion/argument rather than address the opinion offered.

[boston bean]

363. Yes, ban boston bean that would solve all the problems.

Ban everyone like me.

That is what you want Skinner to do?

Is that what you expected after the rules change and it didn't meet your expectations, so you left.

So what?

[dionysus]

374. are you trying to do your best to make a case for it, or something? you're putting on quite a show.

[truedelphi]

1611. You now become my "ignore" number

Four.

[DevonRex]

377. That's dishonest. Roy said maybe it would be best to ban HIM if it's okay for people like YOU to

act this way towards people like HIM.

[boston bean]

403. Oh yes, put Roy on the cross for boston beans sins. please......

[DevonRex]

428. Actually, I greatly appreciate that you've illustrated Roy's point so very well.

All of his "little friends" owe you a debt of gratitude, really. :grouphug:

[dionysus]

445. !

:rofl:

[boston bean]

451. oh please, boston bean has made the case that all who don't agree with Roy or

you, since you are so grateful for my writings, are the reason for all of DU's angst.

you give me way to much credit dude.

[DevonRex]

462. Not a dude, but thanks for playing.

The orderlies will see you to your room now.

[boston bean]

470. good one.

:eyes:

[dionysus]

556. why are you referring to yourself in third person like bob dole?

[DevonRex]

790. Took the wrong little blue pill?

:smoke:

[azmouse]

754. Love ya!

:yourock:

[DevonRex]

787. Backatcha!

:toast:

[sellitman]

1245. In one fell swoop I just improved DU for me & me alone.

I put you on Permanent ignore.

Carry on Mr Bean....

[GOTV]

531. You'll be banned and you'll say "See, I too was banned just because I support single payer"

and it won't be true then either.

[boston bean]

701. Why would I be banned? please enlighten me.

I said nothing rude or crude.

Are your little fingers alerting right now to try and get me banned?

As you can see the swarm has arrived.

[DevonRex]

371. I agree. I have no earthly idea why that poster would belittle you in that manner but it's horrid.

And no sane person would pay for the "pleasure."

[boston bean]

384. horrid?

[dionysus]

390. .

1 archaic : rough, bristling
2 : innately offensive or repulsive: a : inspiring horror : shocking b : inspiring disgust or loathing : nasty <a horrid man>

[boston bean]

397. Well, I guess it was a little rought and bristling

but I don't think it was offensive, repulsive, inspring of horror or shocking or disgusting or loathing or nasty.

[SoxFan]

1111. Actually, it was all of the above

[Hekate]

1077. "I'm here trying to honestly give my opinion" No, what you are doing is baiting, looking for a fight

... so you and whoever can Alert and complain that the person you baited struck back, oh boohoo.

I'm trying to read this subthread, going back and forth trying to find out what your actual point is, and this DOES seem to be your point.

Is this the only way you can "win" a debate?

Hekate

[dionysus]

288. god damn if you aren't proving Roy's point perfectly.

:rofl:

[DevonRex]

322. I am truly sorry I ever tried to engage in a civil discussion with you after that diatribe

you just spewed at RGB. You wouldn't know civility if it bit your behind.

[dionysus]

335. i instructed wadsworth to buy stock in Pampers... my portfolio has been booming lately...

[boston bean]

347. here comes the swarm do do do do. here comes the swarm

and I say it's alright.

[dionysus]

359. yes, just another cackle of rads, we are. bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[Bobbie Jo]

1133. LOL

:rofl:

[lillypaddle]

601. bitter much?

:shrug:

There's a bunch of pure nastiness on this board that has nothing much to do with politics, discussion, or anything other than bile.

[SunsetDreams]

642. 2 Posters are a swarm, who knew?

[DevonRex]

356. You might want to diversify and buy some Depends stock for all the pissing contests.

:evilgrin:

[Number23]

1272. Why don't you find something else to do instead of harassing people?

Roy's comment wasn't directed to you or even about Obama. You look like a blithering damned idiot.

[WI_DEM]

137. I concur in a lot of what you say

The tone here is very anti-democratic. When more posts are critical of the president than the GOP then I wonder if this really is a democratic site.

[boston bean]

144. It's not anti Democratic. The issues are not Anti Democratic.

[WI_DEM]

160. much of the rhetoric I see is anti-Obama with many posters who give him credit for nothing

so you put it your way and I'll put it my way.

[boston bean]

175. Speak to the issue please. Leave Obama out of it. What do you and I disagree about on the issues.

[Touchdown]

1678. Up to 18 now.

:hi:

[liberalmike27]

162. I really can't tell what you mean

This post is very vague RoyG.

Were you cursing and it was deleted.

Were you pulling for tax cuts to the right, and hating Muslims and it was deleted.

Or were you too far left? Like I said, the republicans have moved so incredibly far to the right, that leaves us with this massive range of democrats. The real problem is we don't have instant runoff voting, and more than two parties, as you just can't get all of our ideas into two parties. That's always a square peg into a round hole problem.

[RoyGBiv]

200. That's fine ...

My comments weren't directed at you. I don't know you. My comments were directed at Skinner. He knows, or should, what they mean.

[jeff47]

967. If that was the case, your comments would be a PM.

You wanted us to see them. Refusing to actually discuss them appears to be rather passive-aggressive.

[defendandprotect]

791. First, politics isn't about personalities .... it's about issues which impact our lives ... every

moment of our lives!

You're hung up on personalities -- whether Obama or specific posters here --

Does it matter to you whether W or Obama cut Social Security and Medicare?

Stick with the issues -- and also try "ignore."

However, this is a debating forum -- if you don't want to debate the issues --

why be here?

[readmoreoften]

1097. +1. I personally don't care about Obama. I'm not for him or against him I'm only

interested in what he does. I don't like most of what he does and I think he's weak when he's not outright on the wrong side. But, in the end it isn't about Obama. It's about where we stand on the issues and how much we take a stand for those issues no matter who is in office.

[defendandprotect]

1239. Right -- the issues don't change because we have a different president -- !!

If you want to preserve public education -- you fight against charter schools

and withdrawal of support from public education whether a Repug president is doing

it or a Democratic president!!

:)

[Number23]

1276. + A million

When this place turned into the anti-Democratic Underground, I stopped caring.

Join the club. But this thread has provided some serious high value entertainment. Seeing the biggest assholes on DU whining about censorship and implying that the reason that people they like/agreed with/whatever were tombstoned because of "their support of issues" and not their deranged, anti-social behavior has me actually slapping my knee with laughter.

[glitch]

118. What a very conscientious statement.

But I don't want you to agonize Skinner, it's not healthy. :hug: Maybe your honesty here will allow you to share your burden. You and Elad have created a remarkable thing here, it has helped a lot of people enormously through very dark times, no doubt not over. I think you know which 'side' you are on, having to come out on it will help release you from your conflict.
I hope it's my side ;) but if it's not, no hard feelings.

DU is simply reflecting what is happening to the Democratic Party. It's not you, it's us. Eventually the party will split apart, it's clear we cannot be trusted to work together. Maybe the DLC will get to keep the party name, maybe not.

Maybe DU should bifurcate, it's a natural result of growth.

[Boojatta]

157. "You and Elad have created a remarkable thing here"

What about EarlG?

[glitch]

176. DAMMIT! I knew I was forgetting someone. But I hadn't had my tea yet.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Sorry EarlG!

[LiberalAndProud]

244. It has to split.

As the Republicon party marginalizes itself more and more, folks who actually pay attention will leave and, perhaps unfortunately, our party is the alternative. So we watch the complexion of our party change. If we have a winning candidate with progressive ideas, we watch his/her position be compromised because our party now represents a much wider spectrum of ideologies.

I await the death of the Republicon party, as it surely will with the crazy fringe ideology it espouses. On that day we may get back to where we started from.

[glitch]

916. I really wanted the DLC to take over the Republican Party. I thought it was a more natural fit.

Progressives vs. "moderates" as the main idealogies. Leave the crazies behind. But it looks like the Corporatists had a different plan.

[truedelphi]

1609. That would be a really nice thing. And

:hi: glitch.

[glitch]

1663. Coulda been great. And

:hi: howdy truedelphi how's your summer going?

[BonnieJW]

119. Dear Skinner:

Thanks for telling all of us what's going on; however, I would not be looking to DU for the answers, but to the economy. There are many who just cannot afford to donate right now. People are just barely making their mortgage payments, have cut off their cable and anything else that doesn't relate to keeping a roof overhead and food on the table. Donations have become a luxury, not just to you but to every other worthy cause. If you check, I'm sure you'll find that every other organization that depends heavily on donations is suffering. Everyone who can should dig a bit deeper and donate for those who cannot at this time, but surely will again when things improve.

[randr]

122. Allow me to donate on live without paypal, please

[lunatica]

124. I'm not donating because I don't have the money

Simply put I can't even pay all my bills much less give money away. I don't have a spare $5 dollars when by the middle of the month I'm overdrawn at the bank.

I need DU and I think it's big enough for all of us. It may not be the good old days here, but it's still a great place.

[sixstrings75]

128. My 2 cents.

I have donated and bought stars for people in the past. I quite enjoy donating on someone's behalf so they can be a 'full' member.

I have lurked at this site since 2003. I've seen it all here.

My reason for not donating is quite simple. There is a cabal here who manipulate and berate anyone who disagrees with Obama and his administrations policies. I had a post deleted because i simply stated the obvious - there is an organized (possibly paid - my opinion)group of posters who use a very defined and effective technique to shut down any discussion that is not pro-Obama.

I feel when a post gets deleted that poster should know why. Who alerted? etc.

There are posters here who are allowed to skirt the rules, be rude and basically control the board. It's BLATANTLY obvious to anyone with a brain. It's the "OPERATIONMINDCRIME" situation times 100. This poster was allowed, for years mind you, to berate and ridicule people with EVERY POST he made. I asked at the time why this was allowed to continue and never received an answer.

There should be one rule, or set of rules, for everyone. No pets, special posters, etc.

I personally will not donate until this issue is resolved.

Again, just my opinion, but I don't think I'm alone in thinking this.

[demmiblue]

154. You are far from alone.

This is my main complaint, as well. Some of the biggest asses seem to be bulletproof (and one of them is already throwing up on this thread). I think if the civility rules were applied more often and on a fair basis, there would not be quite as many problems.

[rucky]

166. +1

A relatively small number of the frequent posters are responsible for 90% of the discourse - putting other members on the defensive instead of contributing to the discussion. Not sure if they're really trolls or not. Some are, but others are just so frustrated, they can't say anything without picking a fight about it.

The pattern is easy to identify. They need to go.

[lumberjack_jeff]

442. Funny you bring him up as an example

You can go back in the archives to verify this, but every time OMC posted about anything remotely controversial, he was set upon by "the club" with the stated intent of shouting him down, ostracizing him and making his every post a focal point of flames.

They succeeded, and now they move on to the next target. It's the Lord of the Flies around here most days. It takes a thick skinned person to not take their bait.

The problem IS NOT the occasional rare individual with challenging viepoints.

[superduperfarleft]

OMC didn't have a "challenging viewpoint," he was just a pretentious prick.

And yet he was allowed to post here with impunity for years.

Maybe if the mods had stepped in long before they did, when it was clear to 99% of the board that he was here to do nothing but troll and disrupt, individual posters wouldn't feel the need to personally sanction him in the only way they knew how.

[fascisthunter]

1090. OMC was a first rate asshole

and it had nothing to do with viewpoints but attitudes towards others with differing viewpoints. The guy was so far to the right, I thought he was a puke.

[tnlefty]

460. No you are not alone in thinking this.

Not at all, and well stated.

[girl gone mad]

464. Yes, it is just a handful of people.

You can tell from the recs and notice how this one small group dominates so much of the discussion, even though they are a small minority within the community.

They've taken over. Assimilate or be banned, I'm afraid.

[superduperfarleft]

481. Bulletproof assholes is the #1 problem.

Not only do the two or three of them consistently act like gigantic dickheads to EVERYONE, they create an environment where this sort of behavior is seen as acceptable.

The fact that OMC was allowed to post here for years without sanction is something that was never fully addressed, and consequently, you end up with another two or three posters who seem to think his behavior was something to strive for.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

652. OMC, er I mean OMG, that is spot on.

For some reason I feel like smashing a model 1979 Formula One Ferrari. (Not Villeneuve's!)

[ThomCat]

827. Oh yes!

There are a few people who definitely seem to get away with stuff repeatedly, constantly, that would get anyone else tombstoned in record time.

Stuff posted in dozens of posts that would absolutely, definitely get anyone in our community tombstoned if posted one time. :(

We've all wondered who are these people related to or sleeping with. Are they just donating large amounts of money and buying immunity? What the hell is going on?

[Ignis]

927. ^^^ Yes, that.

Those posters who break the rules again and again and again and again and never, ever suffer for it show the rest of us very clearly how the game is played.

It's not what you know; it's whom you know.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

636. You are not alone. A (seemingly) organized hardcore of 20 or so posters

seem to have a religious zeal (with the certainty that entails) in trying to disrupt and derail any conversation.

The jump into almost every thread with bile and personal attack and innuendo.

And their shocking behavior arises because they know they will never be bounced because they are on the "right" side.

Witch-hunters.

[defendandprotect]

796. Agree --

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

659. ...

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JokerImmunity

[nadinbrzezinski]

698. +100 that has been going on for years

I have had my own fans....

And nothing is done to those people.

I still dug deep and gave a little... but that is a serious problem.

[Radical Activist]

855. There's strong evidence to think you're projecting.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8871218&mesg_id=8871418

I'm reminded of how conservative talk radio hosts always accuse Democrats of doing whatever nasty thing is being done by Republicans. Then it can be dismissed as "both sides are doing it."

[Catherina]

883. +1. More truth. Excellent. And to emphatically quote you:

"I personally will not donate until this issue is resolved."

[readmoreoften]

1105. You're not alone. I also think there's a propaganda crew. They start threads but

rarely discuss. They sway things with red herrings when they do. They don't want to talk issues. I don't call people out because I'm never, of course, 100% certain whether or not someone is a paid poster for the administration or whether an individual has an almost religious attachment to the presidency or whether they're just bullheaded. But it seems quite likely to me. And it would make sense. I mean, come on...

[wickerwoman]

1157. This is the core of the problem for me as well.

Bullet-proof posters who post *nothing* but antagonistic bait for *years*. It creates a culture of paranoia when obvious trolls are allowed to run riot all over the board and constructive DUers are disappeared for getting fed up with it.

There are rules about civility. They just need to be enforced. Content-free snark should be deleted. Posters who are on the ignore lists of hundreds of DUers should be red-flagged and evaluated for banning. And make it clear that this is what you are doing. Maybe more people would make use of the ignore feature (and thus hold back on some of the most openly hostile behavior) if they had a sense that putting someone on ignore was serving a constructive function for the community.

I agree that the core of the problem is the inability of the current system to deal with death-by-a-thousand-cuts trolls. I realize that this creates more work for the admins and the mods but maybe some of that work can be shifted to the community at large. Not something simplistic like 25% of active posters have you on ignore, therefore you are banned, but something like 25% of active posters have you on ignore, therefore we are going to start a review process to weigh your net contributions to discourse on the site.

If it were me, I would run an "activate your ignore list" campaign for a week or so. As everyone to put on ignore the people that they think are most contributing to the demise of civil discourse on the site. Then promise to seriously evaluate the top five or ten most ignored people. Worst case scenario, you would make a dent in factionalism by encouraging partisans to make better use of the feature. Best case scenario, you ban some trolls and give DUers a sense that they have some control over their community.

[Stinky The Clown]

1545. That's commendable.

But, as is so often the case, your excellent suggestion will get lost in the hundreds upon hundreds of snark and flame posts in this thread, the very same sorts of posts you're talking about.

I hope someone who gives an actual shit takes the time to pull the real gems, like your post, out of this far too long thread.

I have no idea if your idea will work or if it is even technically possible. But it is, indeed, a great suggestion.

[NorthCarolina]

1264. Well said. eom

[bigmonkey]

1356. Maybe we should have an ostracism method.

The ancient Greeks had it, of course. The bar would have to be set really high to make it very, very hard to manipulate.

[laughingliberal]

1424. +10,000 nt

[Kermitt Gribble]

1572. +1 n/t

[NYC_SKP]

132. Kick. Rough economy and back to school for many of my friends...

Thanks for the thoughtful discussion!

:kick:

[jotsy]

667. I see this a good spot to pipe in on.

Mornin' Doc. Get some popcorn, we're dabbling through some flix.

Don't know that I've expressed developments here as how I see them, and that's through the eyes of a parent. The term is growing pains. As much as Mr. Allen talks of 'giving' DU to either side, he knows the place is a child he'll always be inclined to want to hold the hand of when needed. As far as the nights we spend staring at the ceiling, wondering what to do to put it back on track or what step you should back pedal to and marvelously undo. He's gotta know it doesn't work like that. DU is in that volatile pre teen stage, real nightmares come in another five years as a human equation, so be ready!
Imagine Clark Kent as a toddler. How many rattles and balls do you think he busted just learning how to apply the strength of his grip? How did his adoptive parents handle the tantrums and ease the disappointments. If I've said this to my grown kids once, I've said it dozens of times..."It's your life, it's a car you are driving. But I am riding shot gun, so don't expect me not to squawk when I see us rolling at a high speed and head on into a brick wall." I contend Mr. Allen has founded the equivalent of an online kid from krypton, as the sheer numbers here serve to make it a formidable force. There are parts of this body that want to speak for the whole, to label and characterize and frame to qualify in determining whether presence is legitimate or genuine. To use a Star Wars analogy, consider DU as Annie, and the emperor playing him like a cheap violin to wield the will of a power outweighing his own. I see suggestions in this thread to create a mirror site, I'd ask those folks to consider the lessons learned from The Dark Crystal, separating the wills into different bodies didn't turn out to be the solution. It's Sam Weiss Gamchee at the end of the Two Towers I hear the most when I think about these boards and the state of them, "there's some good left in this world and it's worth fighting for". The fight I see here is not about good, it's about politics and all the theatrical parlor trickery that accompanies it.

If memories serves, Air America officially went silent the same week the Citizens United matter was handed down. A teary eyed week for me, to see something named that to be allowed to fall. You chose to name this baby Democratic Underground, the concept of the expression is a (pardon the movie pun,) precious thing to me. So the question has become whether certain participants will be permitted to dictate the nature of conversational flow for others. IMO, seeking any level of control betrays what is democratic as a concept.

Is all that DU can be going to survive being riddled with the bullets of agenda driven commentary. Some to disrupt and cause doubt, others to 'manage perception' or control the message. My suggestion is to let DU be the underground that serves the democratic principle, let the party apply itself to that and it might find itself more appealing. In the last couple of weeks alone I've seen a couple of long time DUers, I won't name names but staples of this place, seen their work rerouted to a place us peanut gallery kids call the dungeon. It causes doubts and makes me wonder if I want to be here, but I stay and I rec the works of other good folks who I also won't name for fear they'd be scrutinized. Such notions don't make me feel much like I'm participating in something democratic.

My household has been living on unemployment benefits for most of the last few months, I've always seen supporting the drive, even though it's a meager amount, as a payment of rent so to speak. I get a spot to keep stuff I write and a place to speak my mind in exchange. Donating may be out of my reach this time around. There are folks here I have come to feel close to, people I've never met, and they are the reason I tell myself I stay. But that's when I hear that damn Sam again, "the folks in the great stories had plenty of chances to turn back when things got tough, they didn't."

I'm trying not to. I'm gonna feel pretty silly if Gollum's a no show, but such are the flaws of being an idealist.

The couch for your next client should be nice and warm, thanx.

:hide:

[NYC_SKP]

1324. This is a terrific reply, jotsy, damn good!

Right perfect!

Keep the dream alive...

:hi:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8986752&mesg_id=8986752

:patriot:

[philly_bob]

141. I usually donate on first or second day, but have been hesitating ...

not because of angst about DU's conflict between partisans and progressives, but because of angst about donations to Democratics in general.

Skinner, your letter made me realize how much I value DU, like six times a day. Hope my contribution -- my largest ever -- made the last-day deadline (although I haven't got my stickies yet).

Regarding policy changes, the only thing I'd like to see is more transparency on tombstoning. I'd like to see who is tombstoned and why. A list updated every so often that lists user name and offending message. Two advantages: (1) train people on polite online behavior and (2) highlight issues to think about, much as "On the Fence" feature does.

On a different -- and larger -- issue, I wonder how pre-election Democratic Party fund-raising is going...

[FirstTimeVoterAt37]

145. You're a stand-up guy, Skinner

For what it's worth, I'm not donating because I'm unemployed. Unfortunately, nobody's getting anything from me this season. :(

Lurk, lurk, lurk...

[msanthrope]

158. You've got a donor star now.

Do me a favor?

Don't turn out to be a troll, m'kay?

Good luck on finding a new job.

[FirstTimeVoterAt37]

212. I'll do my best

...to honor that favor, mate. Many thanks to you.

[OnyxCollie]

148. DU has lost its objectivity.

It is no longer a place to have a rational discussion about policy. Criticism of policy now means:

You hate the President.
You want Sarah Palin to win.
You aren't "pragmatic" and you lack understanding of what it takes to "win".

This board has taken the course of becoming an echo chamber for those with closed belief systems, as if prohibiting any undesirable opinion will somehow make everything better.

Step 1. Prohibit undesirable opinion.
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Profit!

It's a waste of time to discuss anything anymore; Cogent arguments are met with snark, condescension, and fallacies.

Were you actually expecting someone (and by someone, I mean those who understand issues and not those whose only concern is a mark in the "win" column), in these trying financial times, to pay for that? Really?

You wrote that you are considering "safe havens" for partisans. Look around you, Skinner. Your entire board has become a safe haven for a particular viewpoint. When you brought out your "new rules" a while back, I wrote that we can't discuss a way to achieve the best goals for the country if we can't even settle on a definition for constructive criticism.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8673473&mesg_id=8676607

Marx, F. M. (1935). Propaganda and dictatorship. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 179, 211-218.

"It is to no avail," Dr. Goebbels reminded his partisans as early as in the fall of 1933, "that we merely make
speeches; we must try to convince through our accomplishments."26

~snip~

Obviously the citizen will not be able to judge these accomplishments with the desirable measure of
appreciation so long as he remains under the influence of any kind of counter-propaganda. His mind must be
"set right." Nothing may enter it that "contradicts" the purport of the officially sponsored ideology,27 so that
ultimately there will be "only one public opinion." 28 Such a commanding scheme requires governmental
primacy if not monopoly over all instrumentalities of opinion dissemination, particularly the press.

~snip~

Hitler himself felt impelled to complain: "It is no pleasure to read fifteen papers which have an almost identical
text." 38 And as recently as in January 1935, the Frankfurter Zeitung editorialized: "Indeed, what one misses most in
Germany is a serious objective discussion." 39

The reasons for this unsatisfactory state of affairs are patent. Nowhere has the government authoritatively
set forth to what extent it is actually interested in a "serious objective discussion" outside the waterproof
compartments of the party.

~snip~

How, then, can the "happy mean between destructive criticism and lapdog servility"45 be attained? What Dr.
Goebbels has to to say about it does not sound encouraging. "The right to criticize," he states, "belongs to the
National Socialist Party. I deny anybody else such a right. The right to criticize is exercised by the National
Socialist Party to a sufficient extent." 46 (p. 214 - 216).

Dismissing the point of the post by declaring Godwin's law hasn't helped, has it?

Those you counted on to give money can read between the lines. It's up to you to do something about it.

[geek tragedy]

344. there is all kind of policy disagreement.

And, yes, there is stupid, unfair, illogical argumentation coming from people who share your viewpoint.

And, yes, you lose when you compare site rules to Nazism.

[OnyxCollie]

375. "And, yes, you lose when you compare site rules to Nazism."

Whoosh. Over your head. (Not that I'm surprised.)

"And, yes, there is stupid, unfair, illogical argumentation coming from people who share your viewpoint."

Too bad the BOGgers are incapable of intelligent, fair, logical argumentation to debate my viewpoint.

[geek tragedy]

425. "Too bad the BOGgers are incapable of intelligent, fair, logical argumentation"

:rofl: Clearly, your mature, rational approach to debate is the model which this site should follow.

[OnyxCollie]

441. Shouldn't you be swarming with your fellow BOGgers?

They're all over this thread. They miss you.

[geek tragedy]

450. Thank you for proving my point more vividly

than everyone who agrees with me combined could.

[OnyxCollie]

471. You had a point?

What was it? That groupthink by a loud, ignorant minority, aided by sympathetic moderators, can shut down any criticism of idols?

[geek tragedy]

486. No, the problem isn't them.

It's you and your inability to behave in a remotely civil manner when confronted by opposing viewpoints.

[OnyxCollie]

530. LOL!

You hate Obama.
You want Sarah Palin to win.
You want a pony.
Obama can't wave a magic wand.
You want Obama to be a dictator like bush.
You aren't pragmatic.
We can fix it later.
Not voting is a vote for republicans.
Obama didn't campaign on that.
It's okay when Dems do it.
It's not criticism, it's bashing.

When confronted with opposing viewpoints, this is what the moderator-approved BOG produces.

How's that been for business?

[geek tragedy]

539. As opposed to threads making the Rec List

that compare Obama to Ike Turner. That was some real classy stuff there.

[Catherina]

921. And Boggers organized to have it shut down by pretending it was a "racist" thread.

There was nothing racist about it but, to my disgust, the flimsy excuse and frantic alerting worked to shut down a highly recommended and popular thread that was critical of Obama.

There's a small handful Obama supporters who shout RACIST RACIST just to shut critics up.

As a Black woman, former HUGE supporter of Obama, I'm sick of it. And I'm sick that posts that point it out as it happens are deleted.

You misrepresent that thread, shamefully. What's NOT classy is throwing the race card around for partisan purposes.

[LostinVA]

969. Know how many times I was called a racist for supporting Hillary?

What a frigging joke. Almost all of the posters who called me that are still here.

[Catherina]

1020. Those were ugly primaries. They may be over but the tactics remain.

I'm filled with shame and disgust over having been any part of a partisan group that engages in those tactics, if only by ignoring such an obvious political ploy back then. It's disgusting and I'm sorry for all the ugliness and hurt caused by partisan zeal. I never called you a racist but I apologize for those who did.

[Mimosa]

1282. LostinVA and Catherina, you 2 are sweethearts

As long as people like you are here, so shall I.*hugs*

[Catherina]

1448. Mimosa, you're a real gem

The feeling is reciprocal.

It's a good thing you didn't see us during the primaries though :hug:

[LostinVA]

1306. I know you never did, and don't you dare apologize for anything

That's the point I've kept making the last few days: many of us who clashed during the Primaries no longer do. We either ignore one another or are now friendly, or are even now friends (I'll mention Creekdog again, so I can ruin his rep). So, I think this "divide" thing is artificial. It's REAL, but to a large extent, it is artificial, if you understand what I mean.

[Catherina]

1447. We clashed a lot

but we were arguing about policies, not personalities, and that made it much easier to come together afterwards.

I know exactly what you mean my dear LostinVA. :hug:

[LostinVA]

1501. I think I may have even had yon on Ignore for a while

So I could cool off. :rofl:

Exactly: it was about politics, not personality, and it never got too personal.

I don't think some posters -- or some Mods or Admins -- get that. That alot of us DID either just go back to ignoring one another, or actually became friendly and/or friends. Not every one, but many.

This is a blanket statement, but I've noticed that, overall, those of us here from 2006 and before "got over it" more often than those who came after. Generally speaking. I have no idea why.

[Skip Intro]

1072. Yes, that word has been beat to death here, but it is used so often because it is effective, I guess

Like LostinVa, I was called that many times too during the primaries because I supported Hillary. And I see it daily on this board even now, in almost every topic. I'm sick of it as well.

[Beacool]

1462. Hear, hear!!!

When the race card is constantly used against fellow Democrats, and anyone who criticizes Obama, it only does him a disservice. It waters down the word and it dilutes its meaning to the point that when there is real racism people just yawn. It's akin to Peter and the wolf, cry wolf often enough and when the real wolf does come no one will believe you anymore. It happened in the primaries, it continued in the GE and it's still alive today. Yelling out racism is a cop out and a way to shut opponents up because it immediately puts them on the defensive. There are few things in this country that are worse than being called a racist. It shuts down all conversation, but maybe that's precisely their purpose.

I'm glad to see that you still come here once in a while.

:hug:

[Catherina]

1701. Hi my friend. Once in a while but less and less. This thread sparks some hope

and if we can find a solution and bring the focus back to discussing issues instead of figthing the praetorian guard under a system of rule enorcement that only emboldens the nastiness, I'll be here a lot more.

It just wasn't worth getting bogged down in dishonest and manipulative games when there's so much work to do in the real world. I'm sorry we've sunk to the level of allowing a small handful of jerks to ruin it for so many people.

I hope things change because if DU can't find a solution, that doesn't bode well for the party.

:hug:

[Beacool]

1705. This is a good thread and Skinner did meet his goal.

We'll see what happens going forward.

I do hope that you stick around. It's always nice to see you on the board.

:pals:

[defendandprotect]

798. +1000% --

[Catherina]

897. +1 n/t

[NorthCarolina]

1279. Spot on. eom

[SargeUNN]

149. Good Luck on fund raising

I would donate but I am having to use emergency money now to pay my bills. Sorry, if I had it I would be glad to donate.

[LiberalAndProud]

151. If a Republicon president is what it takes to make DU home ...

I'll pick the cantankerous DU, thanks all the same.

:)


I try to keep in mind that the folks who disagree with me about how good or bad is our current president and how wise his choices, are still my allies on the issues of importance. If we disagree on process ... well that's life, isn't it?

I know that there will be a time again (all too soon) when we be reunited as we were under *. Ah yes ... the good ol' days at DU. I, for one, do not yearn for an early return. Yet, when they do, I will be glad that DU is still here.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

152. Remember when you dropped the gavel on marriage equality? That was good. More issues need that.

- Reproductive choice
- Creationism vs. Evolution
- Social policies in general (minimum wage, Social Security etc.)
- A few short-lived issues like the "Ground Zero" "mosque"
- Extreme "tough-on-crime" excesses like three strikes and others

And maybe others I forget. Just like in marriage equality, you can identify right-wing BS on these topics in the first couple of sentences of a post, if not before. The approach should be just the same IMHO.

There IS such a thing as a tent that's too big.

You'll notice I'm leaving out some very obvious flamebaity issues in which I believe the side I don't like kinda, sorta, maybe, if you squint the eye and tilt your head, may look like it has a point. Either that or, like I said before, I just forgot.

[fascisthunter]

618. .

[tnlefty]

153. Forgive me, I have read through this and some of the responses,

and I'm still stuck on "scolding, shame on you e-mails"...what the hell?

I think I've e-mailed twice: once early on when I forgot my password:blush:, and once to see if you had received a check as we were still having mail, marked as anything with democrat on it, disappear. We even had a Time magazine cover, President Obama on it, defaced before it hit our mailbox.

I will admit that over the past few years the name calling, snark and rudeness have bugged the hell out of me and it seems to get worse.

[defendandprotect]

810. I was also surprised at that .... maybe those e-mails should be made public ....

how about an OPEN system of e-mails to Skinner?

Then we can all see what is being said -- what the administrators are faced with

and trying to react to -- and judge for ourselves what's going on?

Agree with you re "name calling, snark and rudeness," but really that's just a

helpful message from the poster telling about themselves!

Ignore it or put them on ignore -- I have one rule for ignore -- disingenuousness.

[tnlefty]

1283. I doubt that those would ever be made public...

I don't use the ignore function often as I usually want to see what people have to say, and I have engaged people who deal in name calling, snark, and rudeness at times, although I'm not here that much anymore because of some of the hateful, nasty shit that is posted here and allowed to stand.

If I'm looking for the free flow of information, which I usually am, and don't want to have to put up with information being spun as 'bashing the President', etc., there really are other sites to look at. Information is information, or so my 50 something ass always thought.

Dahr Jamal (sp?), at truthout.org and many others have done some excellent reporting about what is going on in the Gulf.

[defendandprotect]

1703. Well, it was really not something I expected would happen.... but I did elsewhere encourage....

Skinner in another post to consider running a thread like this once a month --

I think at least once a month is necessary because look at the size of this monster thread!

Give people a chance to say what's on their minds and it will enable us all to see how

much simple "whining" is involved -- how many good suggestions members may have -- and

what can get corrected on a monthly basis? Yeah -- people won't say it exactly as they

might say it in a private e-mail to Skinner -- but we don't really need that -- we just need

the gist of what's going on!

Be sure to bring any news you find that isn't being posted here and post it!!

[rucky]

156. Why aren't the rule changes helping?

Is it that the mods are being overrun, or that people aren't using the alert function properly or often enough?

Because I think if those in the "frustrated with DU" faction would help enforce the rules, rather than breaking the rules when they publicly express their own frustrations - and we enforce it strictly and heavily enough to show how crucial these rules are - people will get the point in a few weeks. Those who don't may need a break from this place.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

163. re: sides

You have to bias things, of course.

For instance, nobody will ever be TSed for expressing too much admiration for the President and many have been TSed for expressing too much disdain.

And that is as it should be.

But that disparity plays out as license.


Example: In l'affaire Gibbs the whole discussion was in-house. There was no issue of RW disruption of the site. The battle was broadly joined on these terms: People on one side saying Gibbs is an asshole and people on the other side saying certain DUers are assholes.

You will notice this dynamic time and again.

Reverse it in your mind and you'll see that the inverse would not be tolerated.

There are different rules of civility.


I would suggest that you revisit why the site is moderated. It is to bar Republican and RW voices, not to maintain a specific opinion stance within the group.

Thus in dust-ups and cases where RW disruption is not at issue you should strive to be truly even-handed.

Impossible task, I'm sure.

[LostinVA]

352. Very interesting post

Seriously. :thumbsup:

[Starry Messenger]

572. Yes.

People are personalizing criticism of the Administration and taking it as full license to lob personal attacks on individual DUers. I've even seen people do it with an appending "So there, how do you like it!" on the end like it was some eye for an eye thing. AFAIK, no one here is a personal friend or family member of the Obamas or any other member of the Administration. It is puzzling to me why criticism is taken as a personal affront. And that is *not* the group that is being weeded out here with the heavy discipline of banning, often without a single warning.

I also agree with Prism that following the actual rules *as stated* would lead to better DU relations. I hated seeing the silencing of the GBLT community here, and I'm seeing this lack of solidarity carried on in torment of teachers, labor and peace advocates and discussions of poverty and the economy. These used to be important things to support here. I'm sad that these issues are being sidelined by the Administration and by proxy, DU.

[readmoreoften]

1161. Agreed.

It's like when Obama makes a minor--and often decorative--gesture to retain my vote I am almost beholden here to not look at the issue and to support Obama even when he is insulting me and causing very real material problems in my life and the lives of those I love. I consider myself to be about issues. And I can't tolerate those who step on people and tell them to "have patience" considering all the right-wing policies being promoted by the administration. Patience=death. Especially when no real change is afoot. That's not an indictment of Obama, it's an indictment of the system he refuses to challenge (and probably couldn't anyway...)

[Go2Peace]

1479. You hit it on the head!

There has been incredible incivility and personal attacks tolerated depending on viewpoint. That relatively small group has been a very large component of the problems.

You also mentioned this in a previous post where you stated that we cannot encourage both adherance to messaging and open discussion. I totally agree. The problem is as much with DU trying to decide what it is. Is it a discussion board? Well then it has to be free and open to discussion.

[Stinky The Clown]

164. You might consider, as a gesture of good faith, an amnesty for those stalwarts who have been banned

To be sure, some trolls were *rightly* banned. In fact, that is mostly true. But there have been a noticeable number of good, contributing posters who have been banned, some for no apparent reason.

Create a review board of sorts, open up an avenue to apply for reinstatement, vet the applicants, and give the worthy among them back their names and their post counts.

There are charges in this thread of uneven rule enforcement. I am in no position to know if that's true or not, but it sure as hell is a commonly held view, leading me to fall back on the old smoke/fire paradigm.

[BeHereNow]

169. Amen. n/t

BHN

[defendandprotect]

815. Amnesty -- good idea ... it's been extended to a few notable posters here ....

[jannyk]

818. Yes! Totally Agree, an Amnesty is needed. eom

[readmoreoften]

1163. +1.

A lot of good people have been banned.

[Lisa0825]

165. I used to donate twice a year or so. I am now a monthly donor... but

I also have in the past made multiple donations to buy stars for people. Once, I went crazy and bought about 15 stars!

Then I got laid off twice, took a huge pay cut for a contract job, and then finally got my old job back. But I am also helping a friend who has been unemployed for over a year and trying to rebuild my emergency fund. So I won't be going crazy and making multiple donations at this time.

But my modest monthly donation will continue.

I think if you scan this thread and note how many people have had to cut back due to finances, you'll see that is the #1 problem.

I knew there would be problems once we didn't have a common enemy. It's no surprise. But this is still a fantastic site.

One thing I would really like to see come back is Ask the Admins. I think one problem is that when people are banned or messages are deleted, often people missed what happened. Then the deleted and/or banned people tell their stories through the grapvine, and so all we hear is their side. I think if disputes were discussed in Ask the Admins, maybe people would understand your decisions better, and not jump to conclusions about your reasons/motivations.

[mrs_p]

177. thanks for your honesty

i just received my student loans and can give a little as well...

[SnowCritter]

183. Thanks, Skinner, for all that you

and everyone at DU does for the community!

I'm definitely a lurker, but I figure I can easily afford to donate if I cut out all the trips to the "gee-dunk" machine. It'll help me loose weight, too.

[pacalo]

184. Psst...

I love DU & its diversity (except for the unnecessary rudeness toward differing opinions), and I believe that when a person visits a website & adds to its bandwidth by posting, he/she should also feel an obligation to regularly contribute to the cost of maintaining the site.

Your heartfelt words have prodded me to put my pride aside & admit to you that my family has been on a limited income for the past couple of years & I'm not able to contribute like I had been contributing in the past.

This is the best site on the internet; I hope you will be able to meet your goal, Skinner.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

185. As an aside, I always thought "number of donations" measures precious little.

DU getting better might very well have an effect of people increasing the value of their donations, while the number of donors doesn't rise appreciably. Conversely for it getting worse.

Do we have a graph of moolah per fund drive?

[nashville_brook]

1053. moreover, it masks the degree to which the community contributes. that robs the

community of a major source of solidarity.

[niceypoo]

186. Get rid of GDP

It is a hold over from the primaries and the primaries almost destroyed this board.

Having said that, I believe much of the problem with donations is due to the economy.

[Terra Alta]

187. Thank you, Skinner.

I live in a very conservative part of the country, and DU keeps me from losing my sanity. I just donated; it wasn't much but I gave what I could.

[scheming daemons]

192. Frankly, when DU became a haven for those that want to destroy the Obama presidency...

...it became a place that I'm not sure I want to send any more money to.

I've donated lots of money in the past.... but I'm rethinking that.



When someone like Nance Greggs gets chased away, it is time to rethink this place.



Too many folks with an agenda of destroying the Obama presidency are permitted free reign here.



...and the place has become much less than it was before.

[countingbluecars]

206. You expressed what I am thinking as well. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

268. The teacher and union bashing is what makes me crazy

That's not why I'm not donating. I'm giving my money to candidates. But the bashing is a huge problem that is largely being ignored by the mods.

[Joe Fields]

686. Probably because you don't have a leg to stand on.

[proud2BlibKansan]

741. And a pleasant Friday afternoon to you too, Joe!

[msanthrope]

767. +100

(I don't have a leg to stand on, either, but at least I'll admit that. I gave.)

[proud2BlibKansan]

982. The balance in my checking account is close to zero

After donating several hundred dollars to candidates who are struggling against well funded republicans here in red state hell, and another hundred or so on supplies for my classroom, I am tapped out.

I believe this is the first DU fundraising drive where I have not only not participated but also where I have not bought a star for another DUer who didn't have one.

To then have a non donor make a snarky comment is just beyond insulting. How sad that it was then applauded.

[msanthrope]

1043. Joe merely noted the irony of you refusing to donate because of 'bashing.'

You didn't claim financial difficulties--only that your money was best spent elsewhere.

That you cite 'bashing' as your motivation might cause a poster familiar with your history to appreciate the irony of your stated reason....

That you chose to come on this thread and insult donors, suggesting that you are giving to something more worthwhile is generally poor form.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1104. I didn't say I refused to donate because of bashing

I said I had already spent any money I may have had available to donate on candidates. Had I known there was a fund drive coming (I mistakenly assumed it would be in September) I would have put aside money for a donation.

And if our friend had ever displayed a smidgen of kindness to me here, he'd have a star because I would give him one.

[Reader Rabbit]

792. Kinda just made P2BL's point for her

I'm a bit discouraged with the teacher and union bashing, myself.

[readmoreoften]

1374. Yes, no leg to stand on...except all those facts and reality and evidence and that kind of thing.

Except for those things, the poster has no leg to stand on. Except the disaster of Arne Duncan, race to the top, Obama's showing his hand during the RI firings and union busting. Other than reality and historical fact, the poster has no point whatsoever.

But even if Obama rang the unions like a handtowel you'd say he's a saint. That's all you people say. Maybe if you'd be more honest, we'd have faith that you're not trolls, paid posters, and bleary-eyed lunatics.

[Dappleganger]

1291. Same here.

Not like we have any extra money these days, however. But the teacher and union-bashing on a daily basis is ridiculous. Supporting public education and supporting our unions are stalwart democratic building blocks and I shall never, ever apologize for supporting them.

[BootinUp]

208. these are my thoughts too

I mean the last month or two it just got way out of hand. Not sure what the answer is though, as I suggested in a recent post, people might just need to wade in and be prepared for the blood sport. I have some minor experience being admin of a forum board and it is not easy to pick sides and take actions to quell a fight and not have the whole thing get worse.

[OnyxCollie]

248. "Frankly, when DU became a haven for those that want to destroy the Obama presidency..."

Stop associating yourself with the Obama presidency. All you did was cast a vote. It's like how people believe the sports team in their town is "their" team.

And enough worrying about criticism hurting Dems chances in the fall. Why don't you start worrying about OUR chances, you know, OUR as in the American people, OUR chances for improving conditions?

Because just voting for someone with a (D) after their name hasn't helped.

[Sea Witch]

267. I agree- It's not about the party, it's about issues that effect real people.

Out in the real world I try to steer people to talk about issues instead of politicians and I think people agree on alot more then the political parties (or websites) would have us believe.

[scheming daemons]

269. "Voting for someone with a (D) after their name hasn't helped"

Really?

Name ONE thing that is worse now, from a liberal's perspective, than it was under Bush and a GOP-led congress?



Things are not as good as they can be... but there's no way you can successfully argue that things are worse now than when Bush and the GOP controlled things.


Things are better. Not as good as they need to be, but better.



Voting for people with a (D) after their name has most certainly helped. You simply can't intellectually argue that things are no better than when (R)'s controlled the levers of government.

[OnyxCollie]

Okay, I'll play.

Name ONE thing that is worse now, from a liberal's perspective, than it was under Bush and a GOP-led congress?

Domestic surveillance. (Oh, wait. Does that count? Because it first got worse under a Dem-led congress, with Rahm being the third largest recipient in the House of campaign contributions from telecommunication companies.)

Here's another. Electronic voting. Wasn't that an important issue? ES&S will be counting 80% of the vote this fall. Sure, the DOJ ordered them to break up, but they seem to be more concerned with dismissing charges against Tom DeLay and prosecuting Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters than pursuing that.

Speaking of the DOJ, how did that US Attorney scandal turn out? When will Obama replace those 80-85 percent of the Good Bushies currently serving? After all, they serve at the pleasure of the President.

[OnyxCollie]

561. ***crickets***

[BootinUp]

330. Would it bother you too much

if I suggested this thread was not really an appropriate one to try and resolve differences with other members views?

[OnyxCollie]

357. Does it "bother" me? No.

Do I think it's an appropriate place? Absolutely. Do you want to be next?

[BootinUp]

367. Would you be addressing something

I raised here or just launching a random attack?

[OnyxCollie]

383. "launching a random attack?"

Criticism equals attack. Got it.

[BootinUp]

507. I was merely suggesting

that how the site is administrated was a smaller scope of discussion than where I thought you were going, but its not that big a deal to me. No, I didn't want to be next, lol. Lets call a truce.

[Greyhound]

727. I have to wonder why you chose to reply to her reply,

while ignoring the original assault.

[BootinUp]

850. not sure if this is worth the effort

replying to your post which is pretty much drivel.

I worked my up from the bottom of the thread. The poster I replied to was the first one I saw that took the type of tone of correcting another members political views, and I thought, before I saw how the thread was going, that perhaps the thread would be more about issues in the OP.

The other post you refer to actually did discuss the issues in the OP.

If you have any other "concerns" share them if you like but I don't think I want to carry on a further discussion on this particular subthread.

[Greyhound]

914. So my question is drivel while "when DU became a haven for those that want to destroy the...

Obama presidency..." is just fine.:eyes:

Witness what you have wrought. It's not just donations that are down, but overall traffic to this site is as well.

Figure it out, when the last liberal Democrat leaves this board because the site has turned into Obama-can-do-no-wrong.com it will disappear due to a lack of funding and interest.

Many, if not most, of the people that contributed the content that created this site have left, both voluntarily and otherwise, leaving behind mostly incoherent and contradictory talking points filled with links to other sources that do not even support the talking point. Where the remaining converts have nothing to say because nobody is left to disagree with.

[Catherina]

949. Exactly. +1 n/t

[Catherina]

943. +1 n/t

[readmoreoften]

1167. Great post! It's insane to identify oneself with a politician at the expense of issues.

It's incredibly illogical.

[Bobbie Jo]

283. Exactly.

"When someone like Nance Greggs gets chased away, it is time to rethink this place."

[JTFrog]

467. +1 n/t

[SidDithers]

285. +1...nt

Sid

[Patsy Stone]

308. Agreed.

But, I have one further thought: if it's true (according to recent polls) that the vast majority of Democrats supports the president, yet the split here is about 50/50 (based on polls I've seen taken here and general observation), it would follow that we have a larger percentage of that minority of Democrats represented here, as well as Green Party members, Socialists, Communists, (fill in other group here).

I think the Admins need to decide what this board is all about. Is it still an underground paradise for the vocal minority or should it reflect the real world majority proportionally? Because I'm not sure it can do both simultaneously, unless we all agree that that's what it's doing, we all lighten up a bit, and we lay off the personal attacks and stick to trying to convince each other of our positions on the issues on the merits of the known facts and logical arguments alone.

Either way, Skinner, I don't envy your decision, but I respect the hell out of you for trying to resolve this.

[LostinVA]

364. Many of the posters you are smearing, which you are, were here long before Obama

Was President. And, no one wants to "destroy the Obama Presidency" except for obvious RW trolls. THAT kind of language is what many of us are talking about. It;s ridiculous, and calculated to do nothing but piss people off.

I have no desire to "destroy" Obama, and would GLADLY vote for him in 2012 if he would act like a DEMOCRATIC President, and not some mythical creature called "Bipartisanignoretheleft President."

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

454. Hear! Hear! +1000!!!!

[laughingliberal]

1668. +10,000 nt

[JTFrog]

557. + infinity

[Greyhound]

595. Good job. Take Skinners post about the schism and it's consequences and turn

it into a demonstration of the issue.

Your statement, "DU became a haven for those that want to destroy the Obama presidency", is both inaccurate and disingenuous. The people you accuse have, by and large, been here for years and have worked tirelessly to promote the principles that the Democratic Party claims to stand for, and you have the temerity to charge them with wanting to destroy this administration that, while purportedly seeking out some mythical 'middle ground', has failed to fight for.

[Radical Activist]

677. The difference between DU and other forums like Kos is very dramatic.

I suspect nearly everyone on DU expects Obama to be criticized. Obama even says he expects it from the left. But it's very clear that DU has become dominated by people who take every opportunity to campaign against Obama whether its even remotely reasonable or not. There's a big difference between the two and it makes DU an ugly place.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

725. That is it in a nutshell --

You see O critics here as people "...that want to destroy the Obama presidency".

I see those same critics as people who want to save a country and, in the process, a Party and Presidency.

[proud2BlibKansan]

746. +1

[readmoreoften]

1168. +1

[NorthCarolina]

1542. +1000. Truly amazing that this simple concept totally escapes so many here. eom

[azmouse]

764. Couldn't agree more.

:thumbsup:

[defendandprotect]

824. When you continue to see politics as personalities -- Obama --

you will not see the issues --

I presume we are all united against having government moved to the right?

Does it matter then whether it is W or Obama attacking Social Security/Medicare,

public education?

[Kahuna]

833. +1

:thumbsup:

[jannyk]

866. Are you saying that the Obama Administration is really so weak?

So weak, that what is posted on DU, by thinking individuals, rightfully holding BO accountable for bad policy, can possibly harm his presidency, destroy it even? He must be a lot weaker than GWB in that case because, with the united might of DU against him, he managed to serve 2 full terms and enact most of his evil agenda. And that was a presidency we were ALL trying to destroy.

BO, the man, said "hold me accountable", "make me do it" and a host of other statements encouraging criticism. I don't remember him saying, forgive me if I'm wrong, "cover my ass', 'follow me blindly' or 'quit thinking'.

I too was a regular and liberal contributor to DU. The reason I am not at present, is the proliferation on DU of posts like yours.

[Catherina]

957. +1. That proliferation, and protection of attackers who twist things, has a devastating effect. n/t

[Number23]

1310. Yep and yep.

[DFW]

193. The donation site won't accept my credit card

This is not the first time this has happened for DU, and my card works everywhere else.

I'll send in a check, but the software still needs work.

[kestrel91316]

194. Don't underestimate the ECONOMIC reasons for people not donating.

In my case, it has nothing to do with whether or not I am happy with DU overall (I am). It's about not starving.

[nxylas]

1514. Quite

Barely a day goes by without reading of some DUer losing their job, with precious little hope of finding another one in the forseeable future.

[TZ]

196. I haven't donated in about a year and a half. and it isn't a montary issue

I like many of the people here and many I dislike. What I really dislike is how uneven the moderation and treatment of certain individuals can be here. Although I'll say its not always the case, I have seen what appears to be one sided moderation.
Also, it seems that there is a bit of a pecking order here where certain people can get away with horrid behavoir...EVEN GET BANNED. But if they have the correct standing, they can come back. Whereas less high profile people get banned for far less and won't be let back in. Also it seems that certain people are "critique" proof. Where they can post whatever they like and if you have LEGITIMATE critques you get attacked and/or deleted for daring to question the mighty one. I find the cult of personality here disturbing, to say the least. Sometimes it seems that all it takes is ONE complainer-to decide what or what is not posted in certain forums. How is catering to a minority of influential posters right?

[libodem]

203. I got fired

yesterday, from my stupid 4 hour a week job. Now I'm even more broke. I love DU.

[Soylent Brice]

211. : (

:hug:

[LoZoccolo]

209. I think I have a small solution to this problem which will generate funds.

[earth mom]

214. I quit donating to DU because I feel like my opinions and views are censored.

I hate the unrec system and feel it is nothing but a vindictive tool used by others to shut information and people down. Isn't freedom of speech what this country was founded upon?!

I am annoyed that we can not talk about 9/11 in GD but instead have a 9/11 cesspool where freeper trolls push the "official" * conspiracy theory 24/7.

I am pissed off that awesome, brilliant and insightful DUers have been tombstoned for doing nothing but speaking their truth without threatening anyone, yet others-fill in the blank-who did threaten someone are allowed back. How is that fair?


I keep coming back to DU because there are still some great people here and great information to be found.


I can afford to donate, but I feel like why bother when no one really gives a damn about what matters to me.



I fully expect my post in this thread to be deleted and that maybe I will be tombstoned for it.

Well, I'd rather have gone out with a helluva lot better post than this, but so be it if it happens.

At least I was honest and spoke my truth.

[seabeyond]

222. and when your post isnt deleted, are you going to come back and say, "color me surprised" and maybe

i dont have the right of it.... my post wasnt deleted. nor have my other posts, nor have i been tombstoned for past opinions. maybe my opinion is allowed, even different from others and i am allowed to speak mind, as long as i am respectful and civil.

[earth mom]

237. Why are you attacking my post? This is MY opinion and MY reasons for not donating, not yours. nt

[seabeyond]

304. you are accusing du of something that isn't going to happen.

you say you are not allowed to talk, as obviously you are allowed to talk. and then.... you ask me WHY i am talking. to your post.

well

it seems to me you are saying, if anyone does not agree with you, or has something to say that is respectful, but less than complimentary, we must be the ones who are quiet.

i just wonder how that fits in all this mess. that you talked about, in your post.

i understand regardless of what i put out on du, it is subject to a response. i am generally ok with it. receiving different thought provoking perspectives allows for balance and outside the box thinking. kinda why i come onto a discussion board.

btw... that isnt an attack. it is a question to what you put out. maybe you can elaborate.

[earth mom]

417. Awesome DUers have been tombstoned for speaking the EXACT SAME TRUTH I do every time I come to DU.

What part of "freedom of speech" don't you understand?!

[seabeyond]

452. lets see, "SAME TRUTH I do every time I come to DU.". and here you are and

and continue to be, without being tombstoned.

could it be, that they were tombstoned not becuase of an opinion but because they broke a rule? while expressing there opinion.

because

you too are giving your opinion. every. time. you. come. on. du. and you are not tombstoned.

i have duers that have been tombstoned that i love, and that i miss and i wish they were still here. i have duers that left because they are angry and feel this sight does not meet their needs and i wish they were still here.

i am argumentative and go against the whole in some areas and still, i am here.

because, i dont break the rules, and i try to keep it civil and/or respectful.

[earth mom]

494. The DUers I'm talking about should NEVER have been tombstoned in the first place.

They did NOTHING wrong.

Why should I sit here and have to weigh everything I post as to whether I'm offending the delicate sensibilities of you or the BOG group?


I come to DU to learn/be informed, share what I know and to vent when I need to.

But most importantly I want to see the truth here-as ugly and as unpleasant as it usually is.


And FYI-I am respectful-except when I see blatant lies and disinfo being peddled or when I feel attacked. That's when I fight back.

[LaurenG]

944. I shouldn't do this but I'm going to

You are nearly attacking earth mom. It seems that you are taking personally what she's saying.
Sometimes people SHOULD be listened to rather then brow beaten, she is stating how SHE feels yet you are trying to tell her her feelings and thoughts aren't real. I'm asking you to consider that maybe you don't know everything and possibly could be wrong.
There really is a problem here, and you trying to say that only your experience and thoughts are valid is a huge part of the problem that goes on here.
I don't think you have a right to tell others how to feel...

Maybe get off the high horse and set a minute with us lowly folks and just listen.

[seabeyond]

1035. lol, ok. nearly attacking?

i either am or not.

because she says she cannot speak out, as she says in same post, she speaks out every single time she comes on du, but she is going to be deleted and tombstoned, as she is never deleted and tombstoned, .... and i challenge that.

i am NEARLY attacking her?

i disagree with her. and for obvious reasons. she hasnt been deleted or tombstoned. please tell me why that is an attack, or nearly so.

another poster above had an interesting post, but every other line was.... and you will probably tombstone me.

i just dont see it

but tell ya what, .... how about if you just censor what i can say or not, discuss or not and i will just sit down and shut up and let yawl go on???? so that i am not on my high horse (attack? name calling?)

isnt that kinda doing exactly what you are bitchin about.

on this whole obama good/bad thing. i am not playing the game. i dont even talk about the policies because reason isnt a part of the discussions. but i dont know how either side can read down this thread and say, they are being the responsible, pure, true poster and it is the other side that is being evil. because reading this thread, i have seen exactly the same, the same bitching, the same accusations and the same behaviors on both sides.

is that attacking?

because really, it is an observation. and this is a discussion board.

[LaurenG]

1098. Well to heck with the nuance - over your head huh?

Maybe just hear what others are saying instead of becoming so defensive. I will just say that your posts at times come across as very arrogant, very self righteous and you don't seem to care that you hurt people in them. There is no discussion just a bunch of invalidation. It's hard to watch and read.

[seabeyond]

1124. why?? why do my posts have to be interpreted as over the head, or forget nuance or

being defensive. why are you allowed to interpret them in such a manner then accuse someone of attacking.

i am sorry you don't like me (well, really i am not sorry cause you are allowed to feel however you like and not skin off my nose). but then call it as it is.

i am sorry you feel i dont do nuance, over head, defensive, arrogant, self righteous and dont care i hurt people, but, lol

really

look at all the names you called me. give me one name i have called either you or mom

and tell me, really, .... who is doing the attacking. and i say it with a smile. truly. cause you don't have to like me. but i find this totally interesting.

you are basically telling me i am not allowed to disagree with a person, where as you can call me how many insulting names.

what sense does that make.

[LaurenG]

1148. I was talking about your post

not you. I don't know you so how can I not like YOU.
As I said above I really knew better than to say anything and I wish I hadn't because this is not helpful either.

[seabeyond]

1170. see, i am not angry in these posts. though i think there is some

anger in the couple posts in this subthread. now, that is just a guess, but then it is what i feel. me saying there is anger is not a cut, or insult, people are allowed to be. and i understand why there is anger. i am not feeling it

listening to this issue i am trying to feel out resolutions. what i do. and having read much of the thread, i have to wonder if the anger is just too escalated on both sides, but especially the side that perceives tombstoning for opinion. and if discussion, a mere discussion without animosity is even possible.

does that sound arrogant? people pissed at me could feel it is arrogant. and i am sorry if you feel that way, because it is not the reality of my posts.

but i do find all this curious.

i am never sorry when someone engages.

[MineralMan]

266. Oh, my...why do you suppose your post would be deleted?

I don't see any rules violations in it. You've told us the reasons you don't donate. OK.

As for all those DUers who are not here, you can probably find them somewhere on the web, still posting. It's hard to keep a dedicated poster down. If you Google the screen names they used here, you'll probably run across their posts on some other forum. I've found folks that way after they left a forum I was on. I searched and there they were.

[Ignis]

961. Posts are deleted frequently that don't violate the rules.

Posts that grossly violate the rules are frequently left standing, despite multiple alerts.

There might be other factors at play, but those of us who aren't "in the know" are only left with the conclusion that it's based on personalities and relationships rather than the content of the posts.

[LostinVA]

970. +1

And swarm alerts.

Remember the Hit List that went around here during the Primaries?

[MineralMan]

987. I don't know whether that's true or not. Generally, by the time

I see a deleted post, it's after I might have read it, so I don't know why it was deleted.

As for being "in the know," that certainly wouldn't apply to me. I have no position at DU other than being a member here. So, the only thing I know about deleted posts is that they're deleted. I assume it's because something in the post broke the rules. I've had a few posts deleted, and understood what rule I broke after thinking about the post once it was deleted. I seldom alert on posts. I'm of the belief that what people write should be left in public view, so everyone can see them and make their own decisions on the nature of the post.

The posts I do alert on are almost always personal attacks against other DUers.

[Ignis]

1005. I'm simply using the evidence available to me.

When I write a post that breaks or bends the rules--which I'd like to think I do a LOT less frequently over the past few years--it's often in a fit of pique while responding to a personal attack. Hey, I'm only human, and I'm not immune to being trolled.

I'm not talking about those situations. I'm glad to see those posts deleted--even my own--because they show the rules are working.

I'm talking about situations wherein the same rules do not appear to apply to all DUers.

[MineralMan]

1011. Well, you'd have to be a lot more specific, 'cause I'm not

seeing that. I'm seeing all sorts of threads from both ends of the spectrum, whether I look on GD or on the Greatest Page. Seems like everyone's getting their say on DU. But, if you have specific examples, I'll be happy to look at them.

[Ignis]

1013. You've never seen a gross rule violation left undeleted?

Never, ever, ever in all your years reading DU?

Well. OK, then.

[MineralMan]

1223. Well, I don't read every thread. But no, I haven't. I've seen lots of

threads with which I disagree, but I have a very high tolerance for disputes. The only thing I absolutely think should be removed are personal attacks.

[wickerwoman]

1398. How about this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8872563#8874117

I would call your attention to post 187 where I am told to STFU for making the apparently absurd suggestion that some DUers have internet access (through public libraries or universities) but are also legitimately too poor to donate.

Why should I donate to a site where I'm apparently expected to take condescending, abusive shit for being poor? And where this post is likely to be deleted and I'll probably get a warning for "calling someone out" but people who blatantly troll with contentless ad hominem attacks rack up tens of thousands of posts with no consequences whatsoever?

[Go2Peace]

1480. Yep. Recognize that person and agree.

[defendandprotect]

838. +1000% ---

I planned to say this at the end of this thread -- but your post prompts me to

comment to you that one of the least commented upon aspects of the UN-REC is that

it is doing harm to the information we come here for --

Also agree with you on 9/11 -- and many other subjects which mods will move from

"general" into specific "dungeons."

Many articles on the environment -- whatever -- at least two last week -- are moved

from the much needed attention of the entire board!

The PURGES have also worked against the board -- the articles -- the sharpness and

quality of the articles being posted here -- I've actually had to do a lot of posting

noticing that many articles have been ignored!!

I especially valued DU because I didn't have to previously do that time-consuming work!!

I've also always withheld larger contributions to DU because of restrictions of free speech.

And the "New Rules" -- which are ridiculous* to the point of being publickly ridiculed --

certainly only made that decision stronger!

[SidDithers]

1576. Hey look! Your post is still here!...nt

Sid

[MineralMan]

216. I donated a couple of months ago, when I had the money.

DU is, by far, the best discussion site I've ever been on, despite its own issues.

The one thing that troubles me, and it's not confined to DU, is that many people focus very narrowly on the goals they find most important. That narrowness of focus can lead to rejection of an entire administration if those narrow goals aren't met quickly enough or thoroughly enough. That's a real problem and, I think, the main reason for all the contention on GD these days. I say GD, because that's where I read and post, mostly.

The thing is, we all have specific goals we consider to be extremely important, and it's difficult for them all to be met at the same time. It's even more difficult for them to be met if we have a specific set of criteria that must be met or a specific schedule. Government is complicated, and most measures must find their way through a Congress that is difficult, to say the least.

I've been around this political business for over 40 years, and I've never seen a single issue resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Never. Never is an issue resolved with every point of every faction satisfied. Never are issues resolves quickly enough to suit everyone interested in the issue. I don't think either is possible in a country as diverse as ours.

Thus it is on DU, too. So many groups. So many issues. So many different points of view.

Progress is at the root of progressivism, it seems to me. And progress is not a single-step thing. I don't remember any important issue that has ever been resolved in a single step. Everything that is important gets resolved over time...often a very long time. There's no mechanism in this country that allows for instant resolution of any major problem that has opponents and proponents.

So, I guess what I'm suggesting is that we all step back a little on those issues that affect us the most and look around and see what else is going on. There has been progress in this administration in almost all of the issues. Slow progress, but that's the nature of this country. Not enough progress, in many cases, but progress. We have a chance to continue making progress, but it's going to take a combined effort. If we divide ourselves and the conservative portion of the country regains control, we'll lose that chance.

Anyhow...that's my opinion.

[countingbluecars]

223. Good post! You make sense. n/t

[Boojatta]

240. "I donated a couple of months ago, when I had the money."

Before you donated the money a couple of months ago, you had the money. After you donated the money to DU, DU had the money. That's the way these things work. Money is like cake. You cannot donate your money and have it too.

[WingDinger]

217. There is only ONE [lace in the universe, where the lefter can hash out our schpeel, before

offering it for popular consumption. HERE. The broad spans of ideas should be entertained. Self rule in any measure, is democratic, and laudable. We get our philosophy tight here, before doing battle in the BI-partisan world. Lose that, and it is like the rethugs are cops, and separating us all, so we cant coordinate our stories.

How to remove trolls from that melee? If you are well intentioned, read FOR progress, lefter than righter preferring, you should be given indulgence. Wish ill on Dems, or Obama, and you get kicked. Auto period of time, on first offense. Direct communication from mod, asking intention. Trolls will hate it here, and well intentioned will stand their ground.

[Whisp]

221. The open mockery and jeering at President Obama here

is disgusting.
And it's been going on for far too long.

I have no complaints about criticism done in a semblance of a respectful manner, criticisms of the administration and of the empire. But the low blow shots that usually came from ignorant republicans and baggers in the past, when those are allowed to stand here something is just not right. The shit disturbers have been allowed to run this site for far too long.

[flamingdem]

250. The disrespect and mockery come from people with an agenda

-- rethugs in sheeps clothing attempting to divide the democratic party or those who believe disruption will lead to their desired changes in the world. That old school desire to capitalize on the dissatisfaction of the masses so we foment revolution or something.

Then there are jerks who come here because they get attention. The anonymity is the draw. Maybe a la Facebook we need to be more invested in the site as the real people not the fictions behind an avatar.

[boston bean]

253. Did you not donate because of your feelings?

I see people here calling Obama a corporatist. Have you heard a right winger or tea bagger call him that recently?

[Whisp]

284. whether or why I donate or not is none of your fucking business

don't go down that road with me.

[boston bean]

514. 10-4

What about the other question I asked you?

And btw, I meant no disrespect. I probably shouldn't have asked.

[Renew Deal]

224. I’ve always wondered if you liked me.

Or if you even noticed me. :D

I’ve been here 9 years almost to the day. I only remember 1 other fundraiser going this bad. It was in 2003 or 2004 around the time of the primary.

I don’t think the problems with DU are as bad as they seem. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Most other forums are unusable nasty crap. This place is pretty decent, mostly because of active moderation and enforcement of the rules. You can’t say FU to someone too many times and stick around. There is an expectation that posts are mostly substantive and a limit on personal attacks. I think DU does a good job in this area.

One of the problems on DU is something you sort of mentioned. Everyone thinks they are on the oppressed side. Everyone thinks the others guys get to get away with stuff. And everyone thinks they are “progressives” and they are being oppressed by the “DLC.” I don’t believe that’s the case.

Another major problem is the unrec feature. It is a disaster. If feeds the negative attitude of those that perceive to be persecuted. The unrec feature is a negative feature vs. the rec feature which is a positive feature. Unrec breeds bad blood. People feel that their posts are being censored by “the other guys.” Even 1 or 2 unrecs on a common ground thread makes people crazy and distrustful of their fellow members. It seems to do OK in member polls, but I think the reason is that it gives people the sense that they can moderate “the other guys.” I don’t hate to tell you “I told you so” on this one. It was a profoundly bad idea from the beginning. It cannot work on a political forum. If you need more proof, check out how it’s working on Digg. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367490,00.asp

You mentioned the center of gravity issue. I think that’s going to begin to fade in around 6 months when the republican primary heats up. We’ll eat those candidates for lunch. They’ll be lots of focus on attacks from the various candidates and the response. This should be a mostly unifying experience.

Here’s what I would do to clean this place up:

1. Eliminate unrec. It’s about negativism in a place that needs positivism.
2. Continue to enforce the rules. Vulgar personal attacks should not be acceptable.
3. Don’t get too crazy with new moderation features. The new alert page is nice, but unnecessary and too much work. People already generally know what’s acceptable.
4. Deal with alerts as quickly as possible. Don’t spend an hour debating a post deletion. Make a decision and go with it.
5. Don’t enact the deleted post lockout feature. It’s not necessary and I don’t think it will do anything build community. We can sort through our crap on our own most of the time.
6. Don’t build an alternate universe “sanctuary forum.” I don’t believe in the concept. You’ll end up with forum wars. It will be like DU vs. FR, but everyone will be on DU. One can argue these forums already exist and they are mostly unused. People want to be where the action is.

That’s pretty much it. Keep in mind that people are struggling financially. You also haven’t unleashed grovelbot in the forums from what I’ve seen. He’s an asset. Thanks!

[Control-Z]

602. If we continue to use the unrec feature,

perhaps it should only be used with a required comment attached - an honest explanation of why it was unrecced. It could help put the serial unreccers out of business, or at least take some the fun out of it for them.

[BootinUp]

627. I agree with a lot here

only difference is I think the deleted post thread lockout should remain, but I don't feel too strongly about it. You convinced me on the unrec thing.

[byronius]

226. No complaints here. I just need a few more days.

Love this place. Always.

[Monique1]

238. Just donated for two Skinner

not much as I would like to give- I hope it helps. By the way whose face got punch at 600?

[smirkymonkey]

232. Well, I made it through my corporate takeover, so I'm back in for

the monthly donation. I feel pretty secure so far. I'm going to contribute now.

[Octafish]

236. DU is a Truth Machine.

Democrats and democrats who tell the truth should stay. Democrats and democrats who lie should leave.

As for the fund drive, like most of my friends here in Detroit, we're broke. Still will scrape something together for DU. There's no place in the multiverse like it.

Than you, Skinner. Thanks also to Elad and EarlG.

[BootinUp]

1515. Who is going to be the arbiter

of truth here? If there is going to be such a position?

[Octafish]

1585. The Facts.

Someone posts bullshit, call 'em out on it. If they continue, can 'em. By bullshit, I mean: lies, propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, libel, personal attacks... It's like the Supreme Court and pornography: You know it when you see it.

BTW: Not my place to judge -- that job falls on the Administrators and Moderators.

[backscatter712]

241. I've become a lot poorer than I used to be.

A couple years ago, I was working as a software engineer, had plenty of money flowing in.

Now, not only am I out of work, but I'm burned out on software engineering, so I'm back in college, and riding on student loans and a tight shoestring budget.

I'd donate, but I just don't have the cash.

[tomp]

243. i think you misstated the problem here:

"..we have two fairly large groups of people who each seem to believe that they are the rightful heirs to this community, and that the other side doesn't even have a legitimate claim to be here."

anyone who knows my postings knows i belong to the "far left" group and strongly oppose obama for several major failures (IMO).

however, i make no claim whatsoever as to anyone's legitimacy to be here.

in fact, i think what we are seeing here is the exact reflection of the major problems we have to overcome to achieve progress. if the people who i think are wrong about obama, and the direction he, the democratic party, and our nation are taking were not here, there would would be no opportunity to debate/resolve the problem.

to my way of thinking, the people who support obama's way ARE THE FUNDAMENTAL OBSTACLE TO PROGRESS . this does not mean i think they (most of them, anyway) are evil people with bad intent. i just think they are wrong, and however well-intentioned, are only contributing to the problem, by naively supporting the democratic party leadership.

but, if i can't engage them, there's no point in being here.

i say this because it is easy to see through the republicans and the right, but serious philosophical divisions on the left prevent us from uniting against the forces preventing progress. it is impossible for me, at a characterological level, to agree to something i think is wrong. compromise with rightward leaning forces within the democratic party is wrong, to me.

all that being said, changing anyone's views about anything generally proves to be near impossible (i mean, how may people have truly changed their fundamental view of politics based on discussions on du? of those who have, i strongly suspect the vast majority have gone leftward, not rightward). there appears to be a growing number of like minded leftward leaning people speaking up here these days, people who have seen the problem that the democratic party leadership represents (incredibly, people are now actually agreeing with me from time to time). of course, then, the reactionary, rightward leaning forces intensify their efforts.

this is a good thing! what is happening here is going to happen anywhere progressive ideas are discussed openly.

but it does not in the least surprise me that this dilemma has risen to this level for you and du at this exact time.

[geek tragedy]

327. Well, that's the thing,.

you want to be able to 'engage' the Obama supporters you view as obstacles to progress, but when they react unfavorably (most people do not appreciate being called an obstacle to progress) it then becomes a tale of "reactionary rightward leaning forces."

Understand that just like you are seeking to undermine the Democratic leadership, others are going to push back very hard to squash your efforts to do so.

[tomp]

1627. i would expect nothing different.

i also understand there is SOME subjectivity in these self-definitions and declarations of rightness. but at some point we have to be looking at the same world and seeing the same thing.
as far as i'm concerned, anyone who doesn't see disaster present and worse looming, and need for radical action (WAY to the left of obama) IMMEDIATELY, just isn't living in the same world i am.

frankly, i don't much care if people don't appreciate my categorizations of their positions. it is what i see and i have to state it in order to express my views. the stakes are way too high to worry about thin skins. i have also learned that the and overly careful polite approach seldom works with entrenched views anyway. better virtual blows now than real ones later when sides really need to be chosen. straight language just may shake a few minds open.

also, the debate with the right within the democratic party isn't necessarily to convince those who hold rightward views. it is more to show those who are in the middle, the young, the niave but honestly searching. they may witness the debate and make their own sense of it and choose to move left rather than right, or stay left.

[BootinUp]

246. Look forward to the survey

good idea to do that.

I admit there are times I get very frustated by factions at DU that really get on a roll and steam roll the place and that this sometimes sours me on contributing to the site. But more often than that if I haven't contributed it is because I am just being a penny pincher.

One thought I have had recently as some of the fighting has really raged, is that sometimes you might just have to look again, do a double take, whether certain points of view are even in the realm of the party at any identifiable level. In other words, are there any representatives of the views that aren't anonymous and lend it credibility. This is already done to some degree of course.

Maybe subdividing the GD forums might be necessary too along the lines of having a flame the democrats forum and a support the democrats forum not sure how well that will work, lol.

All in all, DU is still where I like to hang and discuss politics which just goes to show what a good job you have done here.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

251. Just how much time a day do you spend reading these forums?

Because I think you've been trolled. Trolled hard.

And I've got the sense that you don't spend a whole lot of time here. Sure, you've got a team of mostly honest, skilled, and dedicated mods looking for the trolls for you. But I think you've got them looking for specific rule violations, instead of seeing forests for the trees.

If you aren't spending much time here, I don't just mean dealing with alerts are discussing everything over with the mods all day, but reading the boards; then I think doing more of that would help.

I mean, you had this whole big "rule change" thing a couple of months ago. Except you never really changed anything. It's almost like you're absentee.

[VMI Dem]

323. The irony in your post is mind numbing.

:rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

339. Why, hello there.

:hi:

[liberation]

475. LOL, no kidding

you can almost cut the projection with a knife.

[Control-Z]

616. Took the words

right out of my mouth.

[flvegan]

665. It is, isn't it?

I had to read it twice to see if I was missing the sarcasm.

[Lucian]

972. Agreed.

[Nostradammit]

1198. It really does make one's head spin, doesn't it?

If the Powers That Be on DU would deal with the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS TROLLS on this site
I'd donate tomorrow. This is the first year since 2003 that I haven't given any money
to DU and until I see some pizza being served I'll donate my money elsewhere.

[hlthe2b]

485. You are really unbelievable sometimes, HFPS

So, Skinner doesn't spend enough time on his own board? Doesn't understand what is going on on his own forum? :crazy:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

579. How often do you see him involved in discussions?

If it's not about board rules, or donation drives.

And when he does chime in he's usually commenting on how surprised he is and how fall the level discussion has fallen.

No, I don't think he understands what's going on in his own forum, and I don't think he particularly cares. You'll notice he seems to care in his OP, but you'll also notice it's a sales pitch.

[SidDithers]

254. I'm a DU'er first, last and always...

If I had my way, I'd prefer to see posters co-ordinating anti-Obama and anti-DU attacks from another website shown the door "with extreme prejudice", as one mod so aptly put it last week.

But, it's not my sandbox. :hi:

Thanks for your comments.

Sid

[depakid]

264. The perception of many is that you've largely been getting your way- and hence, a problem

Me, I'd prefer to see an amnesty for many of the long time posters who added a lot of thoughtful content to DU's fora over the years but who've been banned for one reason or another with increased frequency over the past 6-8 months- some apparently without warning.

But hey, it's not my site either- just my 2 cents.

[TZ]

334. I'm far from agreement with you on many issues...

But I'm with you on this. I think alot of the banned folk were provoked. And that they go elsewhere after being unfairly treated, they feel and complain loudly is no surprise at all.

[LostinVA]

379. Exactly

[depakid]

408. Conversely, you can see two "provokers" repeatedly spamming this very thread with impunity

making worse comments than those which have gotten countless others banned,

[SidDithers]

551. You and bean?..nt

Sid

[boston bean]

660. show me spamming. show me where i have called a person a name, where i have ridiculed with words

about pampers etc....

[Catherina]

+1. +1000. And the mod system is blind to the provocations which only encourages more of it n/t

[corki]

418. You're not even an American.

Why do you care so much? He's not your President, he's ours. Mind your own business. Best Jon Stewart joke of all times.

"Hey Jon, what do Americans really think about Canada?"
Jon Stewart: "We don't"

[SunsetDreams]

682. Ever heard of Americans Abroad?

what a BS post.

[DevonRex]

752. That's Naja/

Arcadian and it's dead. Again. :rofl: But not before it called for banning me and dionysus. Again.

[dionysus]

858. i'm starting to get a vague notion they don't like us!

[DevonRex]

879. Was it the "I really hate that asshole" part or the "ban those 4 shitstain trolls" part

that gave you that idea? Perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt. They could be simply having a really bad day. Pardon my language but I felt the need to quote.

A little hippie music or reggae and burning a fat one down might take the edge off and they'll be right as rain and jolly again in no time. Or asleep as the case may be. :hippie:

[dionysus]

892. and here i thought they were mellow people....

[SunsetDreams]

976. I knew it was a "shadow" person, it was obvious.

[DevonRex]

992. They're so cute at that age, aren't they?

:evilgrin:

[BootinUp]

988. oh dear

Arcadian used to drive me nuts. I missed the Naja reincarnation.

[SidDithers]

1579. Naja, arcadian, Jara Sang, Goathead, corki...

for someone who hates DU so much, they seem to want to keep coming back. That unhealthy obsession would be hilarious if it wasn't so disturbing.

Sid

[Joanne98]

255. We need a new rule. Everytime a DUer's is mad at another DUer they have to

pick up an baseball bat and smack a republican in the head. If everybody just did that they'd feel alot better.

[Cetacea]

279. When you see my name

You have a lot of smashing to do.

[whatchamacallit]

256. Alright I'm in

whether you like it or not ;)

[JaneFordA]

258. No problems, Chief :-)

I have NO complaints about this forum. None. The only suggestion I can ever think of is hardly original with me (one of you brilliant lot wrote it up and I thought it was great) is that when someone UNrecommends a thread, it would carry the screen name of the unreccer.

This is because on the VERY rare occasion that I disagree with the contents of a post, it's my responsibility to make my argument with that good old "reply" option. I have little time for cowards who don't stand by their work.

So all these months I've been hanging out here with you terrific people, that's my only--geez, is it a complaint or a suggestion!?!?! Don't know. I rely on you all to set me straight... and the one who thought up screen names with UNrecs... I wish I could remember you so I could give you the credit for this GREAT idea!

:-)

[GeorgeGist]

265. Progressive Underground?

[WI_DEM]

273. Well that would be one solution and would make more sense with many of the posters here

who would then be able to openly campaign for a Green like Nader over the democratic nominee.

[geek tragedy]

340. The problem is that the site would then suffer huge traffic

and member losses.

[Catherina]

1001. All those threads supporting rightwing Crist that the mods said were ok hurt DU's credibility

It send a very loud signal to the Left that DU, like this new Democratic Party, will support the right wing over progressives any day.

You get traffic and member losses right there Geek and your bogeyman Nader had nothing to do with it other than being proven right, again.

[LostinVA]

382. Better Nader than Crist

[defendandprotect]

843. Agree -- wasn't that the original dedication of the website...to PROGRESSIVE solutions?

[defendandprotect]

849. dupe ... but will use it to reply to "increased traffic here" ... are we against new members?

Members who might contribute?

And, traffic can be directed -- without creating TABOO SUBJECTS --

nor DUNGEONS!!

[SidDithers]

1581. Great idea...

you get on wit' your bad self and set it up.

Sid

[Trailrider1951]

271. Hey Skinner, thanks for taking the time to let us know what's up

I really appreciate DU, and I think my life would be the poorer without it. You know, I've been a daily reader and mostly a subscriber since I found this place back in 2004. Sometimes I post, but mostly I lurk 'N learn. But I will always feel free to criticize my DEMOCRATIC president and congress critters if I have a mind to. Hell, I've criticized my DEMOCRATIC presidents all the way back to LBJ. I am not going to stop now with President Obama. I supported and voted for the man, and I think that he has MUCH room for improvement. And unless we who are dissatisfied with his actions and policies CRITICIZE them, how is the President and his staff supposed to know that we are dissatisfied? And make no mistake, the President and his staff are smart enough to keep a finger on the pulse of the population who make up his base. That includes the posts here on DU. I think you would be surprised who reads this site. In any case, barring personal attacks, I think it is wrong to ban our long-time participants for simply voicing an opinion that differs from your own. I'm in favor of letting ALL voices be heard. Besides, you wouldn't ban me, I'm a subscriber.........would you?

[proud2BlibKansan]

278. I'm giving my money to candidates, Skinner

Perhaps others are doing the same?

[Javaman]

286. That was an incredible post Skinner. An interesting peek behind the scenes.

While I consider myself a solid progressive socialist. Strongly on the side of the left, I feel that limiting those of the left, the center and of the conservative side of the on going political debate that is DU, would be very detrimental to the overall conversation.

There are many that choose speak out of their butts from time to time, (myself included lol) but when the argument it reasonable and well supported, all points of view should be welcomed.

You have a very hard job and from what you wrote, it sounds like you look upon the past with a sad whimsy.

Trying to disassociate yourself with the day to day operations of this site and also trying to keep in mind the larger picture is a herculean task.

I have supported the various changes that you have made in the past (because it appears to me, that any change you do make isn't taken lightly), I know that any future change will also be dealt with the same consideration.

Change is always good. Sometimes a good shake up now and then is a good thing.

Cheers to y'all. You do a heck of a job and I am very thankful for it. :)

And yes, I will be donating.

Oh, only one criticism, my DU bumper sticker is pealing in the Texas sun! LOL

[LoZoccolo]

289. There's really only two things I would change.

1. Currently a lot of dedicated partisans have sought haven in the Barack Obama Group, but the rules surrounding groups on DU prevent them from discussing counter-partisan attacks on the rest of the board. This was more appropriate when it was actually a primary candidate forum, but I think overly restrictive to the purpose it has taken on now; I think attacks from the left, which can many times be very disingenuous, are going to be important to dispel throughout Obama's term. I like your idea of a partisan forum, but I think if it's going to be effective you may have to lift some of the restrictions that are placed on the Barack Obama group.
2. As planned, banishment from a thread after a deleted post.

[AsahinaKimi]

293. um, I have this feeling

You will reach the goal. Today is Friday. Your deadline is Sunday? hmm.. Its up to 600 now, just need another 400. I have this funny feeling it will work out..

[AllyCat]

294. I dunno Skinner. I haven't donated because I donate in the fall but gave again

after that because of ...the economy I guess.

DU is still my home page. I check daily at work from public computers so as to reduce my risk of retribution. I love this place. I'm not a huge Obama supporter and never really was, but got behind him in 2008 because I thought he'd help us.

What I would like people here to do is forget about Obama to a degree and get out and work for people they LIKE in the midterms. If you don't like these idiots running this year, donate to those you do. Work for those you do. Lets start some stuff to help us, not complain about Obama (as much).

I'd love to see the folks here railing against the corporations MORE, against war MORE, against poverty MORE. We have other places that could easily be the center of gravity. Obama isn't going to listen to us. Lets go to the ones that might.

[AndyA]

295. Hi Skinner! I think there's more to the donations issue than unhappiness with DU.

Yes, that might be part of the problem, but I think money is very, very tight for a lot of people right now. I've been putting off donating until after the plumber gets finished at my house today. If there's anything left, I'll make a donation.

There are myriad reasons why people at DU disagree right now. And we're basically following the political trend, because the Democrats don't agree with each other, either. Even normally stable Democrats like Howard Dean are taking heat now, and he's normally a DU hero.

Don't worry about DU, we'll make it and we'll work through the issues. Conflict comes with the territory, and some do like to stir things up just for the thrill of it. Being able to identify when that happens and going on to other things instead of challenging them is best. I just click the alert link, and then I don't worry about it again. The mods generally do a remarkable job.

Things will pick up, I think DU just reflects the general sentiment of the country right now, and it's really hard to find things to get excited about.

Thanks for all you do. :thumbsup:

[ProSense]

296. Interesting post and points, but please consider

that this may be due to the fact that times are tough for a lot of people, including many who now find themselves unemployed. Also consider the timing of your appeals? Have you considered making them around the first part of the month instead of the middle? There are some people who get paid once or twice a month. Still, a lot of people take care of their bills at the beginning of a month so an appeal on the 16th is likely to coincide with a period when most people are strapped. I speak from experience, and many times the appeals have caught me off guard.

[YvonneCa]

871. I agree with this. Many of us have once...

...a month paydays.

[WI_DEM]

305. Here's an example of what the problem is, Skinner:

I posted a piece by Eugene Robinson praising President Obama on several fronts and what is the first response?

1. BS ALERT eom

That was the message "BS alert" and then gone--no explanation about what is BS.

[Javaman]

312. I get those emotion based responses as well.

I disregard them when the offer no supporting point of view, facts or links.

They are just griefers who get off on griefing.

Life is too short to worry about them.

[MineralMan]

800. That's a fairly common thing. The one word response that

simply says "I don't like that post," with nothing added is pretty worthless, overall. It always makes me say, "Well, there's another country heard from." On the other hand, someone who disagrees with a post and says why is trying to discuss the question. There's too much of one type of post and not enough of the other, I think.

Someone, and I can't remember who it was, posted "Bullshit" as the entire response to a couple of my posts in a thread. Nothing else. Now, that may be that person's opinion of the posts, but it's not at all part of the discussion. Unless you can take a moment and say something about why you disagree, no discussion takes place.

I'm guilty of writing more words than I need to, sometimes, in replying to a post I disagree with. But I'd rather read too long a response than a terse, insulting one that actually says nothing.

[BootinUp]

1517. I admit to doing too many posts

without enough explanation, I tend to get in a mode where I just want to answer/respond quickly to many different things. Its something I should work on...

[Hansel]

1334. This is a good example, Skinner.

I could live without those who come into every positive thread about this administration to basically take a dump and say the same stuff they have said over and over again in just about every other thread. Most of it pretty uninformed, sarcastic and lacking any value. Like this example.

For some the purpose seems to be to demoralize, disrupt and distract anyone else from discussing anything positive about this administration. They aren't here to discuss a point of view. They are here to prevent any rational discussion on points of views that they don't agree with.

If there was a new rule, it should be to prevent posters from engaging in a pattern of entering threads for the purpose of disruption without adding any value to the conversation or at least defending their position with something other than easily verifiable falsehoods or right wing talking points.

I thought there was a rule about dismissive name calling such as "kool-aide drinkers" or "cheerleaders" to describe anyone who dares type anything positive about Obama or dispute claims made against him. I don't see much action to address this. On a site called Democratic Underground one should not have to hesitate to make an argument in favor of this president's actions for fear of attacks and name calling.

Sorry Skinner but it is out of control. There are still a lot of people who have not gotten past the primaries, other progressives who seem to be blinded by dislike for this admin and who refuse to allow anyone else to voice an opinion without personal attacks, and a handful of right wing moles who've gotten away with their crap for far too long. They show their true colors when emotion driven topics arise and they practically vomit Fox talking points.

I know I'm not perfect, but I also know I don't come here to engage in games and distractions. I come here to discuss the important issues of the day and sometimes it feels like I'm doing it in Glenn Beck's living room.



Edit to add: That being said, I still intend to donate on Monday.

[corkhead]

310. I think the "center of gravity" analogy is spot on.

the change took place during the '08 primaries and I expected a return to pre-primary DU after the election, but it never happened.

I would also suggest that part of the problem is the mix of who is here now. I don't remember previously encountering the bullies I have run into lately. I think that the Democratic Party being a big tent has brought in a lot of disaffected republicans, (I'm not ready to call them trolls) who feel compelled to be on the "winning team", but who I believe will most likely end up finding their way back home to the Republican Party come election time.

I don't come here any less, but I am more hesitant to post because inevitably I get jumped on by somebody in a way that goes beyond what I believe to be civil discourse. That seems to be an unfortunate unintended consequence of anonymous posting imho.

[LostinVA]

386. Good post n/t

[skip fox]

313. I donated for years when it was easy to donate. Before Paypal which

doesn't work for me.

I'd do so still, if it was easy.

[still_one]

314. and maybe the slow donations have something to do with the economy /nt

[Gormy Cuss]

315. Please nuke GD: Presidency, or rename it GD: Stop Saying That About My Obama.

GD: Primary had a common goal purpose, that of sorting out how Democrats were aligning with various candidates. In my wholly unscientific observations of GD and GD: P, the latter is the place where there is the most vigilant group shouting down any opposition to an administration position. I'm stunned that fellow Democrats think the party needs to be monolithic in its opinions. Get rid of GD: P and let all general discussions take place in GD. At least in GD there are regular participants from all camps.

Also, please extend the spamming ban to the Lounge. That would solve some problems there too.


I appreciate your post, Skinner. It's nice to hear how it looks from the admin side.

[EFerrari]

361. And see, if I were the Skinner of DU,

I'd give GDP to people whose first priority is to support the president and GD to people whose first priority is social justice. This is the "cut the baby in half" solution. Then the twain needn't meet except in LBN and DU would be more manageable and my avocado tree would sprout and the cat hair would roll itself up into neat piles maybe. :)

[LostinVA]

396. I would be 100% for that if BOG was shut down

Because, I think that forum has caused alot of problems in many ways, firstly by perception by most of DU, secondly by posters being preemptively banned from the forum before ever posting (nope, not me). even posters who aren't known for being "rabblerousers."

Barack Obama is the Prez.

[Raine1967]

458. personally, if you want to see BOG shut down, why not suggest

and request to shut all of these: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=348

You might not like that forum, and that is your right, but perhaps others might not like say, just as an example -- the Dennis Kucinich forum.

I could say any number of forum cause problems, but removing any of them is not going to solve anything.

[LostinVA]

759. Barack Obama is President and there is a GD: Presidency forum

[EFerrari]

560. It seems to be a breeding ground for resentment on both sides. n/t

[MineralMan]

807. I don't go to the BOG very often, and don't post there, but I don't

see lots of posts being made in that group. In that regard, it's a lot like most of the other groups. I certainly don't see it as some hotbed of plotting against whomever you think is being plotted against.

I've been told that there are some other sites on the Internet where people plan forays into DU, though.

[CBR]

629. A forum that gets like 5 posts a day sure gets under your skin.

Mountain meet molehill.

[LostinVA]

761. See, there was no reason for you to insult me in such a nasty way

You accused me of something that isn't true: it doesn't "get under my skin" -- and then dismissed my opinion with snark. Thank you for proving my point.

[Hekate]

804. snark! snark! LOL-- first you call out an entire DU Group, then you object to a mild snark-retort.

:applause: :rofl: :applause:

[LostinVA]

876. I didn't call out the BOG, I said it creates resentment

,amy others agree with me. See? Your post is what people are talking about,"INSULT -- so there!" Care to try to discuss and not be snarky?

[CBR]

832. If that is a nasty insult then I do not know what to tell you.

You have never really experienced nastiness.

What if we got rid of all subforums on DU and only had GD, LBN and Lounge? Excluding one seems unfair.

[LostinVA]

881. Of yes, I have -- a member still one here called me a c**t during the primaries

I have been told by a member still on here I needed to eb mouthfucked with his dick so I'd quit being a lesbian. Those are only the tip of the iceberg. You are going out of your way to be snarky. It's very interesting to me to see certain posters doing this all over this thread, while certain other ones aren't.

[CBR]

1143. You are the biggest spammer on this thread.

Switching back and forth between insults and veiled passiveness. You are not fooling anyone.

We all have been called nasty names during our lives.

[Bluebear]

1229. 'We all have been called nasty names during our lives.' - arrogant as Gibbs.

[Touchdown]

1683. Hey! Lay off her!

She doesn't deserve this.

[Catherina]

1694. Thank you for this fine illusration. n/t

[quiet.american]

799. What is meant by "firstly by perception by most of DU"?

Edited to add:

Anyone can post there if they are up for posting within the mission statement of the forum:

The mission of the Barack Obama Group is to discuss information and news about the life, career, accomplishments, and presidency of Barack Obama; to provide a haven for those members of Democratic Underground who support the president and his policies; to discuss President Obama's policy positions, speeches, interviews, and other public appearances; to discuss President Obama's political campaigns; and to discuss the causes which President Obama has championed, including health care reform and ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Those who have a generally negative view of President Obama and his administration, support his defeat in the 2012 presidential election (in primaries or the general election), or who are generally supportive of those who do, are not welcome in the Barack Obama Group.

Can those who were "banned" from posting there really say that their posts tell the story that they *don't* have a "generally negative view of President Obama and his administration"?

A refreshing thing about the Barack Obama Group forum to me is that you can post news, photos, articles, etc. pertaining to the administration without them being unrec'd, engulfed in nonsense, and otherwise vandalized.

Why that gets under the skin of some DU'ers, I don't know.

[SeattleGirl]

975. It gets under their skin because they know they can't come

and post their bullshit there, and can't come in and attack those who post in the BOG.

Really bugs the hell out of 'em.

[RetroLounge]

1189. and this is why you and I no longer speak here

think about it.

RL

[Drunken Irishman]

1119. Agreed...

I mean, look at some of the slime in the BOG currently!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x24922">Stupid mccain tries to give bush credit for withdrawal in Iraq..what an idiot.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x24932">"LET'S DEFINE 'FAITH' "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x24921">Gay man among Obama’s recess appointments

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x24931">Steve Benen's Quote of the Day~

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x24925">Press Transcript on Obama's Religion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x24914">The timely leaving of our troops from Iraq.

Utter trash!

[Hekate]

1205. Evict all the BOGtrotters and BOG froggies! We needs to drain the swamp! oh noes!!!11!!!1

:rofl:

[Arkana]

1733. Maybe if you and yours hadn't flamed and unrecced

and shat up every thread that gives Obama credit for accomplishing things.

And I'll remember this little post the next time you and yours complain about being "persecuted".

[LostinVA]

388. +1

[WI_DEM]

400. It's my view that GD is the place where most of the anti-Obama rhetoric takes place

and so those who support many of the things the president has done did take refuge to GD-presidency--but even there it's getting completely infiltrated by those who give Obama no credit for anything.

[EFerrari]

456. And the flip side of that viewpoint is, it's hard to have a conversation about anything

without being accused of attacking Obama and Democrats.

[depakid]

459. If you want a "refuge" from criticism- that's what the BOG is for

GDP was created as the "fight it out in the primaries" forum- and later as a presidency forum- it would pretty boring if it ended up as only an echo chamber, don't you think?

I think so at least- though others seem to prefer like the comfort of continual reinforcement to critical thinking and challenging ideas.

[LostinVA]

772. That is actually EXACTLY why the BOG was formed

[Gormy Cuss]

526. What you posted actually supports my assertion about GD : P

Refuge? No, it's supposed to be a forum to discuss the presidency. The refuge is the Barack Obama Group.

Infiltrators? No, those are posters who care about the administrations stances just as much as the posters who won't say a negative thing about the president. Discussing how and why certain policies have been implemented or policies that need to be considered is a way of hashing out our own opinions and since the board is probably monitored, a way of giving feedback to politicians.

I absolutely want this president to succeed and I want a Democrat in the White House for the next term (preferably Obama) but when administration members whine about the "professional left" and gay bloggers being mean to them I start to wonder whether the administration cares at all about progressive policies.

[LostinVA]

774. +1

I want Obama to make me want to vote for him in 2012. Why wouldn't i want a Democratic President to be a Democrat and succeed???

[LostinVA]

766. It isn't "anti-Obama rhetoric" -- that's the whole core of the problem

It is criticism and discussion of the Administration's policies, and someone's about Obama's own action. VERY rarely is it bashing, and when it is, it is almost always someone who is either a newbie troll or someone everyone knows is an "OMC Syndrome" poster. And, OPs like that are almost ALWAYS locked down quit quickly.

[defendandprotect]

869. Are you sure it's specifically personally directed ... or is it just criticism of

what happens to be Obama's policies?

Are the posters you're claiming are "bashing" Obama against his hair color?

Or his eye color? Maybe they don't like the fit of his suits? Or his ties?

The way he walks or talks?

Because if what the poster is doing is complaining about Obama's actions on

policies or issues -- then it's not "bashing" -- it's criticism.

Try the "ignore" button --

[deacon]

1430. It's totally frustrating. n/t

[dpbrown]

316. I like being here - since 2001 for me.

I'll stick around as long as I don't get banned. lol

[MilesColtrane]

317. For my part, I haven't donated because I can't at this point.

A medical issue left me unable to work for several weeks, so I'm trying to dig myself out of a hole right now.

I should be able to donate in October.

As far as the sniping going on here, I believe that if the existing rules are enforced some of the problem will be fixed as we get closer to November. (i.e. Those who advocate against a Democratic candidate will be shown the door.)

I think you should consider adding as a ban-able offense the promotion of not voting for a Democratic candidate.(Or, perhaps even declaring that you're not voting in an election with a clear choice.)

Sitting out a race in which there is a Democrat running against a Republican facilitates a Republican win, and trying to get others to do the same as some sort of protest is idiotic and regressive.

That would certainly help to tidy up the place.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

319. From the very beginning of DU --

it was about the Truth. Remember that? The Truth that Al Gore really won that Presidency.

From that day on the Truth was what was foremost.

The Truth about who Bush was, the Truth about what damage his policies were doing to our country, the Truth about the lies we were being fed.

DU was the place we came to because we wanted the Truth, not the bullshit being peddled by the Bush Administration and the mainstream media. And we got the Truth. We had the best and the brightest here, working endlessly to research, to connect, to lay it all out there for us to see.

Skinner, you can either be about the Truth or you can be a partisan. You cannot be both.

There are a million places on the Internet for partisans to make a good, safe home.

The Truth has a harder time finding such a home.

Hell

[EnlightenedOne]

329. You are right

DU had issues nailed generally right off the bat.

So what is this "truth" you're speaking of now?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

419. How about these Truths -

Warrantless wiretaping is WRONG.

Rendition is WRONG.

Our air war in Pakistan is WRONG

Military tribunals for detainees are WRONG.

Holding GITMO prisoners after they have been ordered to be released by a judge is WRONG.

Backing the coup against an elected official of another country is WRONG.

I could go on, but I suspect I would be wasting my breath. I will end with this:

If it was wrong when George W. Bush did it, it is STILL wrong when a Democrat does it.

[Ignis]

966. +1. DAMN right!

Policies, not personalities. :patriot:

[Catherina]

1029. I wish I could recommend both your posts. +1000 n/t

[geek tragedy]

336. But, what if the Truth isn't what you think it is? nt

[Hell Hath No Fury]

358. Sorry, but when it was Bush in office --

we all were quite capable here of knowing what was the Truth as backed by facts and what was bullshit.

Many of us still retain that capability. Some, not so much. Some appear to be blinded by the big "D" after the President's name and have lost the ability to distinguish Truth from wishful thinking.

[LostinVA]

406. The truth is the truth and will always be the truth

Being pro civil rights, pro social justice, anti oligarchy covers most things, and seeing constant OPs against these very things is horrific to me. I lurked from almost Day One of DU, and have been on here for years, although the bullies and unfair moderation had me take a hiatus, along with many, many good liberals who have no desire to come back, because of the Rightist turn by DU, a turn that the Admins publ;icly endorsed a few months ago in Skinner's "Changes" OP.

[WI_DEM]

343. See that is the problem--only those who know the "truth" are true dems and oppose Obama

while those who support Obama and think he is doing a good job are a bunch of political hacks. It's insulting and also egotistical.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

395. Who opposes Obama?

Most of us oppose specifical policies and actions that are wrong.

The exact same as we did when it happened under George W. Bush.

It's called moral consistancy.

And when someone now supports what was wrong under Bush just because it is being done by Obama or a "D" then yes, that person is a political hack or a super fan. :shrug:

[LostinVA]

882. "It's called moral consistancy"

:thumbsup:

[jannyk]

877. The ''Truth'', and intelligent discussion, is what I miss the most. eom

[readmoreoften]

1177. nice.

[LWolf]

1633. + 1,000,000

[Aleric]

324. BE UNDERGROUND and I will DONATE

What I want from DU is a place where I, one of those "Professional Liberal Retards" can debate with center-moving-rightward democrats that now make up the Democratic Party. We,the liberal/radical wing of the party have been treated like naughty, disobedient children for the last 20 years. Ever since Dukakis tried to hide his ACLU card behind his back the Democratic party has been running scared from the L-word. Yet, rather than listening to us and engaging us, the mainstream party has rebuked us, repudiated us, refuted us and insulted us. Is it any wonder that we've gone Green? The party acts like we are their property. We aren't.

So, now, DU has instituted new policies that will allow no dissent. So, what point is there for me to stay? If you are going to side with Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs, there is no point in my being here. If I want to watch a cheerleading competition I can find one any weekend here in Texas. But my sport is not cheerleading, it's politics.

I have more honest political debates with conservatives than I ever do with Democrats these days. You want to be "underground". BE UNDERGROUND.

Be a place where us unrealistic, radical, elite, liberal, professional, socialist whatever can have an honest policy debate with democrats and we'll be back.

[geek tragedy]

333. An army of strawmen.

Nobody is requiring you to shelve your policy disagreements. Nobody.

The problem is when people have an anti-Democratic, anti-Obama agenda--they wish to defeat Obama just like they wanted to defeat Bush.

[Aleric]

360. Wrong

I've had posts disappear for criticizing democrats and the party. Policy and party go hand in hand. It's DU that promotes the anti-democratic agenda when they stifle dissent. We may be anti-Democrat, that's not the same as being anti-democratic and you are eschewing every opportunity to get us back.

[geek tragedy]

438. If you're anti-Democrat, you can't expect Democrats to throw

rose petals at your feet. Nor can you expect to be given free reign at DEMOCRATIC Underground.

Yes, people within the party should be able to kvetch about what's wrong with it.

But, people who want to tear the party down? Nope.

[Aleric]

548. You misread...

I've never said I want to tear the party down. I *am* willing to give up on it, there is a difference. I want the party to come back to the left, If that's not possible, I must search elsewhere for representation. Maybe I won;t find it but there is little point to supporting a party that no more represents me than the Republicans. Will this tear the party down? Hardly. Like the market the party will slowly decline until it finds its soul again and moves leftward. Then people will return to it.

Besides, the party is not the core of the left. It is an appendage. If it is cut off a new one will grow in its place.

[Sea Witch]

I think that you have a very one sided point of view

and are reacting to the poster as if the poster is your enemy rather then just someone who sees things from a different angle. I think that is what the site owner is talking about in his post. It's like two different camps that have many of the same goals but are so invested in hating one another that they can't stop for even a moment to listen to one another.

Just my opinion in reading this thread. My post is not meant in a mean way or as an attack, just some observations from a new person looking in at you all.

Not just you, but alot of people, both cheerleaders and critics, who are unable to converse with people who they are convinced are the enemy. You all are so mentally and emotionally invested in being right, in winning whatever argument you are having, that you forget that the person you are fighting with is, in the long run, on your side. You all just yell and yell and every so often the people in charge get fed up and kick someone off.

This stuff happens every day on the internet in every type of forum imaginable.

[Aleric]

That is very fair

You are correct. My entrenchment came years earlier. I think what hurts most about this instance is the claim to being 'underground.' It's what brought me here, it's what's kept me here - the hope that I could have a debate with the people who I supposedly share sides with without tangential and personal attacks. Free of the establishment viewpoint which is molded by the system that rewards submission instead of independence. I think you can see that hasn't really worked out.

[Aleric]

444. This is very fair

You are correct. My entrenchment came years earlier. I think what hurts most about this instance is the claim to being 'underground.' It's what brought me here, it's what's kept me here - the hope that I could have a debate with the people who I supposedly share sides with without tangential and personal attacks. Free of the establishment viewpoint which is molded by the system that rewards submission instead of independence. I think you can see that hasn't really worked out.

[geek tragedy]

448. The person said he was "anti-Democrat."

Politically, that means there's very little of us to cooperate on. He wants my side to lose support and suffer electoral defeats. I want the opposite.

[Sea Witch]

476. Well that's your choice then

I was hoping you might take some of my words to heart. Have a nice weekend.

[asdjrocky]

906. You're totally spaming this thread.

I scroll through, and I see you here more than anyone else. Constant immature snarks and baseless attacks.

And I have to wonder, why you're still here.

[WI_DEM]

337. actually dems have been moving away from the left since the '72 McGovern landslide.

[Aleric]

350. I stand corrected.

I stand corrected. My awareness of the intricacies of Democratic Party politics began with the Dukakis fiasco.

[defendandprotect]

894. Only because GOP/right wing propaganda works .... and they control the airwaves...

When actually honest polling of the nation is done by elites to find out where they

really are, then the results are that this is a liberal nation ---

and you can see the proof of that all over DU, for one --

and the fact that there are still more registered Dems than there are

registered Repugs -- despite the many game-playing scams by the Repugs --

[dionysus]

348. .

:nopity:

[Aleric]

365. you fiddle while Rome burns.

How apt.

[dionysus]

376. no, i'm fiddling while people throw tantrums, there's a difference.

[Aleric]

387. Then don't throw a tantrum when we vote Green

[WI_DEM]

392. Well at least you admit it.

[defendandprotect]

898. Unfortunately, third parties and their platforms are more or less a TABOO subject

here, which prevents us from actually understanding what other DU'ers might

be thinking about how to bring about "change" --

[Tarheel_Dem]

1669. And that's been the goal all along. They think they smell blood in the water.

Skinner may not admit it, but they are as much an enemy to the Democratic Party as the Republicans and the Ron Paul nuts.

[tallahasseedem]

385. LOL!

Simple and to the point. I like that in a DUer! ;)

[county worker]

366. This is not to criticize your idea or what you posted. I agree with most of the "professional left"

ideas but, (and I don't know how to say this in a good way) I am sick of reading all the self pity posts!

Post your ideas and quit with the "we are being picked on" shit!

[Aleric]

380. Then...

Don't complain and whine when we vote with our feet, our wallets and our ballots.

[county worker]

436. You are going to do what you are going to do.

What I am saying is so many posts here are not about ideas but about being picked on. I know people pick on each other.

How do we get to the debate and around the hurt and attacks?

Even your post says to me that I am not getting my thought across to you.

[Aleric]

525. Well let's examine

Look at your original reply. It had an attacking tone. Saying, "I don't know how to say this in a good way" really doesn't mitigate the message.

Look at my post. Is it inflammatory? Yes. Very intentionally so. Why? Because I have learned the lesson from years of debating within the left that "money talks and bullshit walks." If I remain a loyal democrat using only my voice, I am patted on the head and called unrealistic. When I use real force (money, vote) I am attacked with more fervor than is ever used on republicans. How many times in the last decade have the Greens fended off election lawsuits brought by the Democratic Party? How many of those same lawsuits have been brought by the DP against Republicans? (I don't have the accurate numbers but based on a limited media survey the Dems sue the Greens more than Republicans."

BUt here you ask a very legitimate question. How do we get around the attacks and to the ideas? I don't know. Bring up Single Payer Health care and you won't see debate about costs, efficiencies, etc - you will see a pile on about how it's unrealistic and we should stop complaining.

Yet, I can bring up that same issue with conservatives and it will be a discussion about ideology - free market vs. monopolization, etc. Sure it gets a dogmatic but there are avenues to go down and have real discussions.

My answer to your question then is this - the group in power has an obligation to create civility and demonstrate the surety of their position by listening and responding respectfully. When the attacks come from the side in power, it delegitimizes that sides moral authority. They very fact that they don't need to listen is the reason they can afford to listen. In this case, however, we have proven that they *do* need to listen because, without us, they can't win. But we don't need to cooperate because, from our point of view, we can't win either way. If we cooperate we get Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs demonstrating institutional contempt for us. If we don't cooperate, we at least get the schadenfreude of watching them rant and rail about how it's somehow *our* fault that they screwed up.

When the side in power, however, behaves respectfully in the face of ranting and attacks, it raises their moral high ground and makes the protester look like an ass. That, in turn, forces the protester to behave civilly or lose the battle for the hearts and minds of the neutral observers.

DU has not been respectful of dissent. The moderators use their power to ban dissenters and the rest merely pile on with personal attacks. Now, DU has exposed its belly and said "Help us. What did we do wrong?" Like it or not, people got pissed off and voted with their feet. Will those that remain prove their loyalty by digging deeper for donations or will their own sense of "purity" be their own undoing?

Politics is dirty business. Purity is sterility in politics.

[Desertrose]

786. "the group in power has an obligation to create civility"

"My answer to your question then is this - the group in power has an obligation to create civility and demonstrate the surety of their position by listening and responding respectfully. When the attacks come from the side in power, it delegitimizes that sides moral authority. They very fact that they don't need to listen is the reason they can afford to listen. In this case, however, we have proven that they *do* need to listen because, without us, they can't win. But we don't need to cooperate because, from our point of view, we can't win either way. If we cooperate we get Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs demonstrating institutional contempt for us. If we don't cooperate, we at least get the schadenfreude of watching them rant and rail about how it's somehow *our* fault that they screwed up.


DU has not been respectful of dissent. The moderators use their power to ban dissenters and the rest merely pile on with personal attacks. Now, DU has exposed its belly and said "Help us. What did we do wrong?" Like it or not, people got pissed off and voted with their feet. Will those that remain prove their loyalty by digging deeper for donations or will their own sense of "purity" be their own undoing? "

[MineralMan]

813. I won't, certainly.

Good luck to you.

[LostinVA]

461. Except GLBT Americans ARE being "picked on"

As are other groups. When ideas are posted, people start with the "picked on," pony and poutrage shit. It's vile and against the ideals of the Dems. It's like telling your kid to stfu because they yell when you spank them. It's ridiculous.

[county worker]

499. I mean being picked on by other DUers

I wasn't clear I guess. I made a OP with my idea.

[LostinVA]

528. We are also being pick on by other DUers

[county worker]

700. Yes I know, I wish it weren't happening

[LostinVA]

777. Thank you -- I appreciate your civility in this exchange

For real.

[county worker]

880. Well I was working for the defeat of prop 8 when I got fed up with the

"wait, now isn't the time" crowd. And the "this isn't where we should make a stand" crowd.

[defendandprotect]

910. Yes... found that astonishing on a recent thread...where the anti-gay

sentiment was trying to be hidden behind a right wing propaganda offering that

"gays were being selfish" -- !!!

And, that thread was not locked -- I think it was actually the opening theme

of the thread -- stated very civilly, of course!!

[ThomCat]

1192. Right, and because it was so civil I bet that post is still there.

Homophobic posts don't get deleted just for being homophobic. The people who post don't need to be warned or anything. As long as the posts are civil, everything is okay. There's no problem.

:(

[Catherina]

1030. Amen. Just amen! n/t

[Matariki]

345. Hey I like it here - same as ever. But I don't send you emails saying so.

Naturally most people motivated to email you have complaints and you're not hearing from the rest of us. I will continue to donate annually as I always have.

[revolution breeze]

346. My 2 cents

I lurked for over a year before I finally signed up. I was bashed as a "repuke" or a "mole" quite a bit. That is until I got my donor star. Then people began to actually read my posts and actually respond in ways that made me think about the way I was looking at things. Although I still don't post alot, I feel more comfortable posting with my donor star. I guess my point is, just because someone does not have a star and has a low post count, don't automatically expect them to be a mole. It almost scared me totally away from this site because I saw a side I did not see when I was just a lurker! Sometimes people join this site to learn! Because of the knowledge I have gained from DU, I felt comfortable enough to volunteer for Charlie Melancon and have been very active. I cannot donate this quarter but plan to do so next quarter when I am able to return to working part-time.

[seabeyond]

373. thumbs up. early on i had a regular on du call me a freeper. i learned to LOVE the guy

he isnt here anymore. but, we did talk about the accusation and i came to understand the number of people that purposely come to disrupt, and why someone may automatically feel that way. wasnt hard for me to understand. after all these years here, well, there are reasons low numbers point in a ertain direction. though, i agree, a person is as likely or not, just trying to learn something.

[revolution breeze]

393. I also understand

I have seen a few disruptors come and go since I have been here. But I think I tend to be more trusting. I spend much more time reading than I do posting. I think it will be years before I have 1,000 posts!

[seabeyond]

457. lol lol

me too. i am not good at picking up on the disruptor's cause, i do embrace, understand, respect differing opinion and refuse to see all with ulterior motive.

[Sheepshank]

349. Boy did I misunderstand

but first let me back up. The knowledge base contained here is invaluable to me...especially living in a very Red state. I value DU and whether in agreement or not with certain posters, find the responses quite entertaining on one level, but a huge assistance in formulating my comebacks IRL.

I can see the frustration in trying to run a board such as this. Don't envy you the troubles and the angst.

But back to the donation thing. Color me stupid, but I assumed that one donation a year was standard and that it kept the membership going for one year. I assumed the ongoing drives were for those that let an annual membership laps or renewed on a different time of year. If this site is driven by the number of donations, I messed with the process since I gave my max budgeted amount all at once ...I can give less at each drive, but the donate at each drive, if that helps the # of donations look more consistent. Am I the only one that thought that?

[Sea Witch]

351. I will be very interested in seeing the results of your survey

sometimes its hard to get idea of how people feel with all the shouting going on and the most vocal on either side being certain they are correct and only their PoV should be allowed.

[LostinVA]

407. The survey won't be anonymous

[Smarmie Doofus]

354. 1. A survey's a good idea.

2. I don't perceive any kind of crisis. I'm happy to share the board with people who don't agree with me.

3. In case you don't get around to a survey: less moderation is, imo, better moderation. This is... or ought to be... a site for grown-ups. If you can't bear to see certain opinions expressed, go to the christian science reading room .org forum, or the like.

[The Hope Mobile]

368. I think its more about the economy.

People are really struggling and there's not much we can do about it. My paycheck just came this morning so now I can give a little bit.

[northoftheborder]

372. DU

I don't understand your pain, Skinner. The name of this post is: Democratic Underground. Within the Democratic Party is a wide diversity of opinion. If you turn this site into a "Bow Down and Worship the President" site no matter what, I will never visit it again. If no criticism is allowed for the President, or any other elected Democratic official, then you will have turned this into a version of Faux News. Maybe I miss a lot of posts, I do not read all of them, as I don't have time to just read posts all day, from anywhere, and I visit a number of news and blog sites. So perhaps unpleasant "conversations" are going on that I do not know about. But one of the reasons I log on here, every day if I can, even if briefly, is to catch "the latest" from your readers and posters who do keep up with breaking news - often posted faster than the major news sites. So I appreciate those who keep this site lively. I will donate again, hoping you do not make drastic changes to the policy and broad purpose of supporting the progressiveness of the Democratic Party.

By the way, I do not post very often, have not ever been censored, and probably refrain from posting anything very controversial or critical. Which does not mean that I do not have strong convictions; and I do quite a bit of "recommending". I very rarely, hardly ever, "unrecommend" even if I disagree with a post.

So, that is a vague description of where I am coming from. If you, Skinner, have a specific axe to grind, perhaps you had better state that in clearer terms, so that us "infrequent posters" know where we stand.

[Joe Fields]

378. Thank you, Skinner, for your honesty.

I knew it wasn't going to be easy, once a dem became president. Especially when that dem inherited the monumental problems from the previous administration. I sincerely hope you can figure it all out.

[lumberjack_jeff]

389. I can only speak for why I don't donate any more.

I'm fine with the rough and tumble of vigorous debate. I'm fine with cheerleading Obama's successes AND bitching about his failures. A community which was designed to avoid that kind of conflict will naturally have a hard time straddling a fence.

Like I said, I can only speak for me. I have several bumperstickers, but I stopped donating when you made it clear that a men's forum was a bridge too far. Issues of concern to half of the population were too controversial because DU'ers just know what men will talk about when good progressives aren't around to ride herd on them.

And now, it's topic verboten. Every poster who ever spoke out in support of the issue is gone with the exception of one or two. Frankly, if I'm going to pay, it'll be to talk about what I want to talk about.

It'd be easy to hide behind my reduced financial means to explain my lack of a star, but it wouldn't be honest or fair to you. I do have a lot of respect for the admins, I'm a Democrat, come hell or high water, and I really liked the way DU was.

I think that people aren't frustrated at DU so much they're frustrated with the Democrats we elected. It's hard to stand behind people who aren't doing what they should.

The feedback survey is a good start.

edited to add:
IMHO, the admins spend too much time designing an infrastructure which precludes DU looking bad (unrec comes to mind) and too little designing an infrastructure which serves people's needs.

[Blacksheep214]

404. Not looking to make excuses

BUT: Today the bank wanted to sell my home at auction and I needed to come up with 4K in attorney fees to file Chapter 7 BK.

Things should improve after we find a new place to live.

Bush/Cheney finally got me. I held out as long as I could.

[nightrain]

405. just like the upcoming elections.... I vote with my feet and pocketbook. I will not contribute to

a site that has moved some of my posts to the hinterlands, continues to allow verbal abuse, name-calling, and the like. Yes, it's improved, but the coddling of the BOGers and the DLC-administrative approach on DU is not healthy. We have other choices, just like November and 2012.

Is that the message you are receiving?

[Aleric]

410. Loud and CLEAR

[LostinVA]

424. "the coddling of the BOGers and the DLC-administrative approach on DU is not healthy"

No other post in this thread is as concise as this one. This is it.

[WI_DEM]

434. I think there is name calling on all sides--people who truly believe that Obama isn't doing enough

and those who think he is doing a good job. I've seen it and experienced it as well.

[defendandprotect]

917. Me, too-! Either we are all fighting the right wing together...corporate control of government --

or we are not -- that is the divide --

And, appeasement of the corporate-gang/DLC among us here at DU is only going

to make things worse here --

[Catherina]

1036. Thank you. Succint. Relevant. Truthful. +1000 n/t

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

409. I'm Not Donating

Nobody is going to agree with Obama on every aspect of his Administration.

But I see people posting highly critical threads about DADT
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about the Gulf Oil Spill
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about Education Policy
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about Iraq/Afghanistan
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about the Economic Bail-out

etc.
etc.
etc.

Twenty months into a Democratic Administration, and these people are still here, relentlessly spamming these forums with any piece of crap allegation they can find.

These people are not Democrats. They do not support a Democratic Administration and are constantly posting negative and disruptive threads. They do not belong to the Democratic Party, they are actively working against Democratic candidates, and they have no place on a Democratic website.

Until this place starts looking less like the Fox News Chat Room and more like a place for Democrats, my wallet stays shut.

[BootinUp]

420. Its an interesting point you make

about if someone is highly critical of just about every single policy.

[boston bean]

433. Are people not to discuss policy here at du?

healthcare
pharma
war
gitmo
dadt
bailouts

There are major ideological positions to be taken on those issues and they are the ones that get the most juice here on du.

are you suggesting there shouldn't be criticism over those.

[BootinUp]

446. I don't have the answer

You might be interested in 2 other posts I made in this thread (the other 2 are not interesting, lol)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8981504&mesg_id=8982147

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8981504&mesg_id=8982264

[whatchamacallit]

422. The current rules don't really favor people like me

but it's not all about me, and this site is still worthy of support.

[LostinVA]

427. -1

Progressives/Leftists tend to not like issues that take, at best, Conservadem stances. Mr. Gibbs statement actually shows that that fear by the Left was warranted.

[Sea Witch]

429. They are Democrats who view things differently then you do

They are not your enemies. You are not their enemy. I bet you all agree on more things then you disagree on. It's as if both sides are so invested in hating one another that any chance of civilized conversation is out of the question.

[LostinVA]

443. Exactly

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

784. One one or two issues, sure....

But there are people on this board who are relentless in their posting of negative information -- and they simply post a negative article from an outside source and don't stay around to debate the merits.

A friend of mine used to call them "Bluebird Visits"

Comes in, Shits, Leaves.

[Sea Witch]

1137. Negativity is relative depending on your viewpoint.

One could also say those who pounce on the slightest criticism of democrats or Obama or even an issue that MIGHT make Obama look badly are also being negative. What I am saying is that this is a big forum and there are people with many different views who behave badly. Unfortunately human nature makes it difficult for us to admit when people we perceive to be "on our side" or even ourselves, are behaving badly.

The biggest thing, in my opinion, is that people need to stop assuming the worst in others and instead ask others " why do you feel that way". Only through understanding can there be peace.

[CBR]

449. +1000

[harun]

511. I'm glad people are being critical. It is when they are dishonest about things

that is worse.

If they lay the facts out and are critical of the administrations reasoning's and actions, so be it. If they pull a bunch of nonsense together, without facts, and just hate and smear then they should be gone.

[LoZoccolo]

532. I understand your frustration but I do see things improving here.

A lot of people have been tombstoned for breaking the rules about spamming the forum with attacks on Democrats; I see this as the right direction but if we want to see it continue we're going to have to make up the shortfall from people who are trying to punish DU for cleaning itself up.

[saracat]

717. Those are crap allegations to you? Those are issues!

Many of those folks are teachers for whom the education policy is fundamnetal to their livelihood, and their ability to educate, or Gulf residents whose survival is at stake,or parents whose sons and daughters were shipped to Iraq or Afganistan. .They are those among us who cannot afford their medical care or have lost their homes and jobs. These people are Democrats too and they have a right to voice their opinions and fears on these issues. I give voice to my opinions not only here but in person directly to those who can make a differnce. You have the nerve to call this "spam" and "crap"?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

793. I think you missed my point....

It's one thing to take issue with the administration on this issue or that issue. It's when the same poster seems to take issue with the administration on EVERY issue that I get pretty friggin' tired of it.

And as I said elsewhere on this subthread, it's one thing to post a negative article for the purposes of discussion -- another thing entirely to post the article and leave. They're just being negative for the sake of being negative.

They have an agenda. And until this website shows them to the door, I'm not donating.

[saracat]

889. I am disatisfied with all of those issues but I don't post and leave.

In fact, I don't see many people that do that. Maybe I haven't noticed. Disappointed as I may be with the WH progress on those issues, I am working very hard to get Democrats elected, those I believe in, those who I believe will at least TRY, on my local state and Federal level. I no longer donate to the national party but I do support local candidates.And I am involved in the Democratic Party. And I have an agenda. To make this nation a better place for ALL. I don't appreciate anyone telling me we ought not to notice that many things are disappointing and some are outright bad. Disavowing reality is how we lose elections. And it really turns voters off. Telling them the economy is better when it isn't only hurts us. And trying to coverup flaws in the system is equally bad.

[defendandprotect]

926. Obviously ....

you have very limited understanding of what you're posting ....


Nobody is going to agree with Obama on every aspect of his Administration.

But I see people posting highly critical threads about DADT
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about the Gulf Oil Spill
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about Education Policy
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about Iraq/Afghanistan
...and the same person posts highly critical threads about the Economic Bail-out

etc.
etc.
etc.

Doesn't it occur to you that these are first of all ARTICLES that DU'ers here need to see?

Why would you expect pro-DADT, or pro-Gulf Oil Spill, or Pro-Charter school, or Pro-war,

or Pro-Wall Street economics here at DU????

Does it not occur to you that these are all PROGRESSIVE ISSUES -- ???

And do you not realize that DU allegedly exists to support PROGRESSIVES and

PROGRESSIVE solutions???



Twenty months into a Democratic Administration, and these people are still here, relentlessly spamming these forums with any piece of crap allegation they can find.

These people are not Democrats. They do not support a Democratic Administration and are constantly posting negative and disruptive threads. They do not belong to the Democratic Party, they are actively working against Democratic candidates, and they have no place on a Democratic website.

Until this place starts looking less like the Fox News Chat Room and more like a place for Democrats, my wallet stays shut.

I'd recommend that you start putting posters on "ignore" --

but realistically I don't think that's going to help you --

[readmoreoften]

1172. Goodness. Is it possible to be for MORE THAN ONE ISSUE?

You people overestimate Obama's relevance and you underestimate people's true and honest concern for real issues. It is LIKELY that a progressive is going to be anti-DADT, anti-drilling, anti-war, and pro-labor. These ideas kinda go hand in hand.

You actually change things by changing them. It could be 6 months or 20 years and almost all of Obama's policies would still be to the right of Eisenhower.

[neverforget]

1421. If everyone agreed about policy, we wouldn't have this problem now would we?

If everyone thought the same way, this place would be very boring.

[Kermitt Gribble]

1586. You are part of the problem.

There should be no such thing as loyalty to a Party or politician. Elected officials work for us - they have to earn our votes. If a person feels an elected official is not acting in that persons best interests, it is that person's duty to vote for someone else who will act in their best interests.

You feel people who want equal rights for everyone are not Democrats?

You feel people who want accountability and truth about the Gulf disaster, environmental regulation and responsibility are not Democrats?

You feel people who support public education, teachers and teachers unions are not Democrats?

You feel people who do not support war for profit are not Democrats?

You feel people who support accountability and regulation of Wall Street are not Democrats?

Democrats were united behind all of these issues against the Bush administration. Now that Obama is President, you change sides on these issues. You obviously are ignorant to, or are ignoring what the Democratic Party has stood for for decades, in favor of simply rooting for your team.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1742. "and these people are still here"

You complain "and these people are still here"...

One "side" is saying stop giving the other side special treatment.

The other "side" thinks that side does not belong here.

Has anyone ever heard of Solomon?

[LWolf]

1750. Sure they're Democrats.

Are you blaming them for Obama's bad policies? If so many of his policies weren't bad, they wouldn't have so much to object to, would they?

[Pathwalker]

412. As someone who wouldn't have made it through the Bush years w/o DU,

I will state my piece with great trepidation. I mostly lurk, sometimes post, and have only ever started two threads in GD, years ago. I grew used to being attacked, but never enjoyed it. When I posted that we would being going to war in Iraq right after 9/11, I was mocked by several "famous" posters. Oh, well, being right was NO comfort. Recently I was told to peddle my "Libertarian views" elsewhere because I used the word liberty to express my support for gay marriage and marijuana legalization. People see and read what they want to see and read.

I left DU during the primaries because I could not stand the vitriolic hatred that was allowed to continue, and is still allowed waaay too much. I have yet to express ANY opinion regarding President Obama's administration because I have no desire to be told "I wanted a pony" or "I wanted McCain and Palin to win" - as if. I've been a Democrat since I was 10 years old, have never voted for a Republican and NEVER WILL. I've been a student of politics for over 50 years now, and know better than to expect miracles, or major change overnight, but I DO have opinions I will not express on DU anymore because the level of snark here now is just too deep and wide. This place just isn't friendly anymore, and that is sad.

Before 2008, I filled 2 three ring binders full of articles and essays from DUers and articles linked here. I rarely find anything I want to print out anymore; I still have the pics of Teddy The Lion, and a list of his accomplishments on my Frig.

I don't start threads either, which as one poster has written, makes me less credible. Why, I don't know. I come here mostly to read, and learn, and have never learned to enjoy being berated for something someone thinks I meant, when I meant something else entirely.

This is just my opinion, and I hope I don't get banned for stating it.

Good luck, Skinner. You truly have a thankless task, and are a masterful cat herder.

[redwitch]

414. I haven't donated because I can't.

We are in financial freefall and the only reason we still have internet is because my husband is a web guy and couldn't work without it. We may lose it for a few days soon anyway as we cannot pay the bill right now. This economy is killing us. I still love DU and would be lost without it Skinner. I will donate again asap. Hang in there!

[Greyhound]

416. With all due respect, this is your doing.

As a relative newcomer (2005), I was initially enamored with DU because of the wide variety of political positions tolerated and, most especially, as the single source for news & opinions gathered from outside the M$M.

Then the Democrats took the legislature. Pelosi took impeachment "off the table" in one of her first acts as the new Speaker and Mr. Dry Powder himself became majority leader of The Senate.

And your preference came through loud and clear. How many waves of mass-banning have we seen since then? How many did we see before that? What positions were most quickly eliminated?

Look at your Mods. Review their posts and positions before they became Moderators and review their arguments for/against various suspensions/bannings since. I remember that when a regular poster with strong opinions was made a Mod, they were relegated to moderating forums and groups unrelated to the positions they so strongly hold. Now we have blatant favoritism shown in both GD: P and GD by the moderators. How many threads have been locked after hundreds of replies and Recs and what posts were deleted and which allowed to remain before the argument was escalated to the point that the whole thread is locked?

There is no longer even the appearance of moderation. Posters that do not subscribe to this administration's plans are forced to parse their words and approach any criticism sideways because their reply will be deleted and they may well be banned at the first excuse, while the pro-administration SVG (small vocal group) is given free reign unless/until their attacks go so far beyond the pale that it is impossible to ignore any longer. Then, they are given multiple suspensions where the others are immediately banned. Well, many of us won't/don't bother any more.

This policy has created at least two other sites and a group of conspirators within the board from this policy blindness, and many of the contributors forced out used to be the among the best posters on this board.

Any of us that want to read AP, Reuters, and Whithouse.gov can go there through a thousand different channels, it is (or was) DU where the other side had a voice. Those voices haven't changed, your reaction to them did.

ETA; And by allowing anonymous negative feedback, (the unrec) greatly facilitated this change. A rec is positive, the unrec negative and feeds the problem. Keeping embarrassing items off the front page could have been accomplished in many other ways.

[nightrain]

468. bullseye!!! Thank you for your articulation!!!

[niceypoo]

473. Changing 'General discussion primaries' to 'General discussion presidency'

...kept the dysfunction of the primaries going. Get rid of GDP.

[LostinVA]

479. Agreed n/t

There is a very different dynamic in that forum.

[Jamastiene]

1476. Agreed

There is no real need for GD: P except maybe during primaries. The Old DU didn't even have a GD: P.

[Stinky The Clown]

845. Very well said

:thumbsup:

[jannyk]

903. Agreed!

[saracat]

925. +!1000!

[Catherina]

1048. I agree with every single thing you said except

"Keeping embarrassing items off the front page could have been accomplished in many other ways".

If the community votes a thread as greatest, there's NO EXCUSE for keeping it off the front page. The underhanded way of unlinking recommended threads from the greatest page needs to stop. Illusions of happiness while the Democratic Party is heading off a cliff aren't folling anyone.

Excellent post Greyhound.

[NorthCarolina]

1285. +1 n/t

[Viva_La_Revolution]

423. Thank you Skinner, for letting us hear your side

after reading it, I'm glad I didn't give up and move on.

[Taverner]

430. I would donate but I can't - been out of work for a while

And I think that's a big factor this time around too...

[quiet.american]

437. Does this site primarily stand in support of the Democratic Party or not?

That's the crux of the problem in my view.

When you talk about picking a side, what are the two sides? That is the elephant in the room.

From what I can see, the two sides are: Democrats and others who are supportive of the President and who support Democrats in general, who celebrate Democratic successes and who are able to have fairly reasonable conversations about what's going on with them when Democrats fall short of their expectations. I count myself amongst this group, and yes, I'm even part of the Barack Obama Group here on DU which, to hear some posters tell it, is something that any true liberal should be ashamed to admit.

On the other side are a band of posters who daily stuff GD and GDP with op-eds that are derisive and scornful of Pres. Obama/Democratic leadership (op-eds that are usually presented as fact, but are often scant on them) and which are usually cross-posted (or based on material) from sites like World Socialist Web Site. Even if someone posts a picture thread of Obama in GD, there will be vitriolic replies in it from this group.

That said, the upgrades recently done to the alert process and other steps recently taken at DU to bring things into balance have been noticed and appreciated in my book.

However, for too long, DU's homepage, and the Greatest Page, have reflected that a choice has been made, (even if unconsciously) and that choice is one that says the Democratic in DU stands not first for Democrats, but for a "democratic" site, in which DU's bandwidth is primarily available as a free-for-all space in which "disappointed Democrats" and others who are non-stop hostile to the Democratic Party are welcome to use it as their bully pulpit.

I realize there's probably a lot of stuff in this post that is cause for deletion, but those are my thoughts on this. I look forward to the survey.

[CBR]

463. Excellent reply. nt

[quiet.american]

540. Thanks for reading, CBR, cheers. nt

[LostinVA]

489. You just proved many posters' point -- than you

[quiet.american]

493. Will look forward to you finishing that thought. nt

[niceypoo]

497. Support doesnt have to be blind

[quiet.american]

500. No, it doesn't. I agree. nt

[Bobbie Jo]

679. Criticism doesn't have to be malicious.

[niceypoo]

899. Nor does it have to be percieved as such

[Bobbie Jo]

1021. "Support doesnt have to be blind"

"Nor does it have to be percieved as such"

Indeed.

[laughingliberal]

1438. There are also a lot of Democrats here who work on and support, for the most part, the Democratic...

Party platform. The administration is often in conflict with the platform on issues. So, can I still be a Democrat if I agree with a platform issue and disagree with the Democratic President when he's in conflict with that?

How about if an elected Democratic member of the House or Senate is in disagreement with the President? Would it be OK if I agree with them and disagree with the President?

[BootinUp]

1519. These are very reasonable positions

the answer is of course! I think I said in one post here that sometimes one needs to do a double take and try to determine if members viewpoints are reflected somewhere in party by known representatives at really any level.

I don't object to people who express viewpoints that are not yet represented clearly. Its more when its that + a spamming kind of effect or name calling of other DU'ers with it that it tends to be objectionable to many I believe.

[laughingliberal]

1548. Thank you for that and for your response to my post upthread.

You and I have disagreed several times here. I notice you are often in agreement with the compromises the administration makes on legislation and I am usually not. In spite of that, we have, on a couple of occasions, been able to reach a civil conclusion to our discussions and I so appreciate that. The posters, such as yourself, who are able to disagree with someone on the other side of the debate without resorting to the snark and insults are a glimmer of hope that DU may, one day, return to its days of feeling like community to its members. I thank you for being an example of someone who can disagree with a position but still understand the points the other person is making and not accuse them of nefarious motives. Thank you for that.

[laughingliberal]

1546. delete, posted wrong level. eom

[fascisthunter]

1573. your attitude is exactly why this site is on a decline

[LWolf]

1751. Is this site a "left-wing" message board, or not? nt

[eridani]

439. It may be the economy as well n/t

[LostinVA]

440. Allowing Crist to be advocated on this board is appalling

Actual liberal Third Candidates aren't allowed to be advocated for, which I totally understand and don't disagree with, but to allow CRIST to be made, as one Mod said, "an exception"? :wtf:

[defendandprotect]

932. Agree --

[Catherina]

1051. That was a sad and revealing decision. Shameful and revolting. n/t

[amandabeech]

1653. It will also be shameful and revolting if Rubio ends up in the Senate.

Meeks is a good guy, and I don't complain about those who support him.

However, we may lose the Senate, and hence, control of the committees and agendas.

We may end up needing even the bluest of the blue dogs and Lieberass to boot to keep the Republicans from really screwing up.

Some Floridian Dems, who think that Crist will caucus with us, may see voting for Crist as the lesser of two evils.

I'm not going to sit in judgment of them from way away.

Haven't you had to hold your nose in the voting booth more than a few times?

[Uncle Joe]

447. The biggest contradiction I see isn't with the posters, it's with the ads on D.U.

I don't understand why D.U. is running Republicans Ads over Democrats, threads by posters doing such a thing would be locked or disappeared and at some point those posters would be eating a granite pizza.

If television, radio and newspapers can have standards and choose whom they will allow to advertise on their mediums, why is it that websites on the Internet can't?

I didn't notice these ads until I forgot to pay my bill and lost my star for a time but new people and lurkers would constantly be exposed to this contradictory information.

I would imagine this may wrongly influence the political leanings of some newer lurkers and posters as to what's acceptable here.

But at the very least it's demoralizing to see those ads.

Having said that, I think D.U. is a great website; because of it's diversity, so long as the debates remain civil and focused on the issues or substantive legitimate criticism.

My own thinking is when I do give criticism to any Democrat, I consider that act as doing them a much needed favor.

Thanks for the thread, Skinner and peace to you.

[florida08]

852. Thank you Uncle Joe

that is exactly my feeling. I don't come here to see ads for the other side. I wrote Skinner to tell him that. Democrats should be able as grownups to discuss their differences without being attacked. Everyone should respect the differences they have, but if I do get attacked then so what. Everyone has good and bad days and the economy doesn't help. Discussion should be the goal not ridicule and I think as a whole it is.

Skinner I would have already donated except the ads for republicans stopped me.

[madrchsod]

453. what the hell would i do all day with out DU?

paypal is on the way....

[Lydia Leftcoast]

465. Here's my take on it

People who genuinely want the Dems to take a stand on something--anything--have to put up with a cadre of posters whose sole purpose in life seems to be to lob snark bombs at them. I'm one of the "oldest" posters here (joined early in 2001), and some of these people literally never make a constructive comment, only pointless, Mr. Benchley-like attacks.

The people committed to principles get banned, while the snark bombers live long and prosper.

I think that's turned a lot of people off.

In my case, though, it's a matter of my business having a very bad year until about a month ago, and I'm paying off bills one by one as the money trickles in.

The fact that the tag teams of ConservaDem attackers are allowed free rein (and that I once received a mod warning for pointing out the presence of the tag teams) puts DU way down on my list of things to contribute to when my finances recover.

[LostinVA]

491. "The people committed to principles get banned, while the snark bombers live long and prosper"

:thumbsup:

[seabeyond]

492. wow. i think you should read 472 and 472 should read yours. and i dont go into political threads

anymore because of the two groups and i just dont see it one way or the other and would rather discuss without dissing or protecting. so i guess the rest of us, that are interested in politics, but see it a third way are out, too.

interesting

listening to these two posts

[TZ]

504. I'd like to point out one thing here..

Here's what genuinely irrates me about your post AND causes alot of trouble on DU...Your assumption that only people that dislike the administration and what its doing are principled. Its insulting. Its why people here complain about "purists". You are basically telling people like me who are more accepting of Obama and his administration that we are unprincipled and not "real liberals". The faction of people who are Pro-Obama no matter what are bad, but just as bad are the people who attack anyone they perceive as centrist or more patient or tolerant of the President as cheerleaders, unprincipled, REPUBLICAN LIKE is just as bad.
Its the total intolerance of OTHER DEMOCRATS and their points of views that are different that makes me have disgust for this place.
And thats half the problem here. Hatefulness and intolerences of different beliefs.

[seabeyond]

537. "Hatefulness and intolerences of different beliefs." and this is everywhere, all issues.....

but your point you were making i think is a good one, beyond what i quoted.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

554. Good grief, I'm not referring to honest disagreements!

I'm referring specifically to the people whom I can't name individually but who specialize in swarming anyone who points out real problems with Obama's policies or who has suffered because of them.

I was not referring to either of you two.

[NorthCarolina]

1565. Here's the part I really don't understand

"People who are Pro-Obama no matter what". To quote Bill Maher, "He's your president, not your boyfriend.". How can anyone discuss policy as it pertains to core Democratic principles with someone who is "Pro-someone just because they have a "D" after their name". Blind support is hardly constructive. As evidence of that, simply look at the lock-step GOP'ers. Is that really the model you want to emulate?

[Greyhound]

653. You make good points. I know that this atmosphere has caused me to stop

putting involved, cited, long pieces together to make a proposition or position. They are instantly unrecced and flooded with nothing more than personal attacks and diversions from the point. This was always common when I criticized Democratic leadership's lack of fortitude under Idiot Frat Boy and has exponentially increased since '07 and doubled again after Jan. '09.

Time for Change, as another example, he spends (what must be) hours putting his excellent works together and they, by and large, get 25 replies, 30 recs, and disappear under the flood of irrelevant distraction-du-jour.

[bobbolink]

1107. That is exactly right. I know I have had many ideas that would have required lots of work, so

I dismissed it..... too much work, just to get slapped around.

I wish the admins would hear this from you, but I sincerely doubt it makes a dent.


Which is a big part of the problem.

[laughingliberal]

1441. Very well said. Thank you. nt

[boot@9]

466. I tried

to donate but could not get through...paypal password?

[LoZoccolo]

469. I'm sorry. :(

My presidential approval poll that was restricted to donors was really just intended to get more people to donate. I thought people would see the humor where I was imitating the famous controversial "Soda Head" polls where they try to get you to click on their site by placing ads containing controversial questions. I didn't mean to pick on non-donors. But that was the fundrasing idea I posted about above.

:(

[Aramchek]

472. Skinner, here is an overview of what's happening:

There is an organized group of people who don't like Obama or most anything associated with him.
They work as a team to flood a thread deemed unworthy with unrecs and snark.
They even have another messageboard where they organize all this effort and talk about how much DU sucks.
It's amazing how much free time they must have.


Then there is an unorganized group of random individuals who actually like Obama.
We don't work as a team to bring down threads or posters.
We each just do our best to stem the tide of hate that flows around here.
And what do we get for that? We are called DLC-paid infiltrators.
But the truth is that we aren't even in contact with each other much less the DLC.

I have to ask,
which of these 'groups' is more detrimental to this community?

The one that has no real organization in which occasionally, out of frustration, someone may make a post that goes too far or breaks a rule,

or the one that uses PMs, outside messageboards, and the Unrec function to create an organized effort to snuff pro-Obama threads and pro-Obama posters??

Which 'group' do you think truly has an allegiance to DU?

[DevonRex]

480. Now THAT took guts and is exactly what I think. Thanks. nt

[BootinUp]

487. The only thing I would point out

is that while I believe there are some posters who organize, that doesn't mean everyone who takes their viewpoint is actualy part of that organizing. I don't think its all as clear cut as you suggest.

[Vinca]

505. Hold the phone! Some of us who are not willing to blindly follow like sheep

are not part of any "organized group." I like and dislike what this administration has and is doing and I would never be interested in participating on a site that was made up entirely of Obama cheerleaders (are they an "organized group??"). As for the diminishing contributions, maybe the answer to why is the most obvious one: we're broke.

[DireStrike]

1716. "Some of us"? I'd rephrase that to "a lot of us". -nt-

[LostinVA]

510. And this reply, Skinner, is indicative of the main problem on here

Not one of the "troublemakers" is a member over there. Lots of TSed members there, and lots of trolls were belong to CC and FR who plan attacks. Liberals have no desire to destroy a Dem Presidency, and thinking that is laughable and clueless. I have read the board so I can see who has gotten TSed, and anyplace with Omega Minio and Radio Lady are lionized is not someplace where serious political thinkers hang out. Your paranoia cracks me up. It's just like the Capitol Hill thing during the Primaries.

Trying to marginalize and demonize liberals and Leftists on this board with such garbage is shameful.

[CBR]

515. Posters in this thread are members there. nt

[LostinVA]

524. Posters in this thread are also members at FR and CC

QAnd plan "swarms" over there and post BS OPs all the time.

The "organized" thing is ridiculous. The liberal old-timers on here with me are not members of some ridiculous "organization." To even suggest that is disgusting.

[CBR]

545. BOGers are accused of being ACTUAL members of the DLC

all of the time. Even accused of being relatives of high-level political people. That is how far the conspiracy has gotten.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

More posters from that website are appearing below.

[LostinVA]

886. I'm neither the goose nor the gander

But i do think it is hysterical people are freaking out about the T, because ConservativeCave has ALOT of people posting here and thinks it's hysterical they're getting so many old time DUers and liberals TSed, yet people are worrying about OMEGA?!

[dionysus]

571. they've got 2 or 3 threads on this thread right now. they're celebrating.

hi guys!!!!
:hi:

[SunsetDreams]

626. yes they sure do

[DevonRex]

719. And calling for our banning, dionysus! We're so special to be targeted by those wonderful

DUers over there AND here for ostracization. And we aren't the only ones.

:hi: kiddies!

[dionysus]

763. i need to grow a twirling mustache i suppose.

[DevonRex]

769. You'd be quite dashing, I'm sure.

[dionysus]

780. perhaps i can take up swashbuckling too!

[CBR]

512. Fabulous!!! Complete agreement. nt

[Beetwasher]

516. You Got It, And Actually The Intent Is Not Just To Snuff ObamaThreads, But Destory Him AND DU

There is a group that hates DU, hates Skinner, hates Obama, hates Democrats and are actively organizing to destroy and disrupt all of the them. They organize SPECIFICALLY to disrupt DU.

Reasonable criticism is cool and healthy, and I don't count all critics in the above group. But there IS a core group of very vocal posters here that have the above intent. Constant, organized negative attacks with intent to destroy are not cool.

[readmoreoften]

1181. Yes. There are leftist who are CONSPIRING TO DESTROY DU AND OBAMA!!!!

It's a COMMUNIST PLOT!

:eyes:

Goodness gracious, how do you talk to people who can't focus on real issues or tolerate criticism at all?

[Beetwasher]

1345. I Don't Know If Their Leftists, But I've Read The Posts On Their Site:They Don't Hide Their Hate

Or their intent to disrupt or their glee at the problems DU is having. Go read it for yourself (as if you already haven't).

Yes, they claim to be leftists, but I can claim to be Mao Tse Tung on the internets if I wanted to.

[LostinVA]

1281. roflroflrofl

Take off that tinfoil hat and put it into recycling.

[Beetwasher]

1348. That Website Is Not Hidden From Public View, The Intent To Disrupt DU Is Right Out In The Open

As well as the hate for Skinner, DU and Obama. Do you think it's a secret?

[Sea Witch]

544. Your post is a terrific example of the extremes here

You are so emotionally invested in hating those you see as enemies that you must beat them at all costs. There seem to be groups of you on both sides acting in exactly the same manner. It's sadly typical of the internet.

[Aramchek]

566. I don't hate anybody. They hate Obama. That's why we are at odds.

I don't want to beat anybody here. I just want us all to win in the long run.
And the only way to do that is through Barack Obama.

[jgraz]

947. "They hate Obama". Oh, FFS.

This childish confusion of "criticism" and "hate" says much more about you than about any other poster.

[LostinVA]

959. +1

[dionysus]

968. actualy, a lot of them really do. maybe *you* don't, but please don't pretend otherwise.

[jgraz]

985. That's simply not true.

I've seen exactly one poster use the word "despise" for her feelings on Obama. Other than that, people are expressing deep disappointment with his policies, but I've not seen any post that qualifies as "hate".

On the other hand, I've seen many, many posts accusing people of hate for posting simple criticism.


Note the number of "haters" who recently praised Obama's comments on the Cordoba center. Most of us desperately want Obama to do the right thing and we celebrate when he does.

[OnyxCollie]

1693. They say we hate Obama

because they don't understand politics enough to know what is really going on. They aren't the brightest bunch. They're frightened by ambiguity and need to cling tight to their Obama security blanket. So, when we say Obama's policies are like Bush, well, that just about sends them over the edge. They don't know enough to agree and don't want to agree because they're frightened, little children.

Obama can't be bad. He's good. HE'S GOOD! HE'S GOOD! HE'S GOOD! You just HATE OBAMA!

It calms their little minds to say we hate Obama. By doing so, they can claim we have an agenda and then they can dismiss anything contrary to their belief system.

The RWers like to use "liberal media bias" as their "Get Out of Thinking Free" card.

[Divine Discontent]

1460. "they hate Obama" - seriously... this is the type of stooge we gotta deal with on here

so sick of it. so tired of the few dozen that literally LIVE on the site waiting to pounce on any truthful/painful complaint about what the Obama Admin is doing, as if their very own child was being bullied!

Anyhow - it's three fold imho (about the discontent around here)

1- bad bad bad economic times
2- people not happy how things have been run around here (it's a hodgepodge excuse, but it's got teeth)
3- and the people like those who say we HATE Obama, who attack that we're racists who are hatin' on the 1st black pres! (riiiiiight, like there's no reason to question the bad policy and capitulation on several big issues)



Thanks to the OP for a heartfelt post...

God bless us, everyone.

[Aramchek]

1602. you might not hate him, have no doubt, there are plenty who do

[Catherina]

1060. "They hate Obama". OMFG. The only way to salvation is through Barack Obama?

but I'm not allowed to truthfully comment on your post because my comment would get deleted.

Your post illustrates a big problem here, true believers against people who dare criticize the One who shall lead us all, the One through whom salvation lies.

[Aramchek]

1601. the only way to progress, friend. Progress.

[quiet.american]

567. I disagree.

That posts simply lays out what amounts to an open secret on DU.

Where do you see any "hate" in that post?

[Sea Witch]

578. It was the entire post.

If you cannot perceive the incredible amount of tension and anger coming from both camps in this thread then I really don't know what to tell you. Just realize that the people you see as your enemy are feeling exactly the same way as you are. The internet breeds this sort of drama and people tend to get so emotionally invested that they no longer see things realistically.

[quiet.american]

592. Of all the replies up to Aramchek's reply, you choose theirs as an example of extremism.

I still disagree with your assessment of that particular post.

Is there a Hatfields and McCoys situation going on at DU right now. Of course there is, that's undeniable.

But laying out an open secret is not nearly as indicative of that extreme as the hundreds of posts that are above it. And below it for that matter.

[dionysus]

563. +1000000000000000

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

570. More to the point... if some freeper trolls wanted to disrupt this site...

how would they go about doing it?

They'd complain about Obama.

They'd be against the "mosque at ground zero."

They'd be against the end to the war in iraq.

They'd be against health care reform.

They'd be against financial reform.

They'd be against Obama's administration.

They'd say "this is Obama's Katrina" and "that's Obama's Katrina."

And they'd get away with it.

[CreekDog]

657. you need to stop labeling all complaints against Obama as right wing

especially when you harassed me over not supporting his expansion of oil drilling not 3 weeks before the disaster in the Gulf began.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

687. You need to stop playing the victim.

I've never harassed anybody.

If your going to dish out "honest criticism" you ought to be able to take it.

[CreekDog]

706. then your criticism should be honest and labeling liberal criticism as right wing

is not honest.

and you've done just that.

[Beetwasher]

765. He's Not Labelling It As Right Wing, Merely Pointing Out That It's Exactly What A RW Troll WOULD DO

To disrupt the site. Pretend the be a pissed off liberal who has soured on Obama.

And he's right. Would a right wing troll come here and be an Obama "cheerleader" to disrupt the site?

No, they would come here and constantly and consistently post negative things about Obama coming from a supposed Liberal point of view. And never post anything supportive. Ever.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

778. LOL

As if the "criticism" of Obama is honest.

[EFerrari]

585. What you've done is show how much one-sidedness Skinner is dealing with. n/t

[CreekDog]

661. who likes and doesn't like Obama is fluid

there are lots of people complaining about his policies and strategy that were big defenders in 2008.

i was a ridiculously strong defender in 2008.

look at me now.

i'm not coordinated, i'm upset, i expect better from a guy that is 100 times smarter than i am.

[great white snark]

662. Thank You!

Very well said.

[Bobbie Jo]

695. The proverbial elephant in the room.

The very definition of disruption.

[MineralMan]

840. Thanks for that. I can't count the number of times I've been called

a "DLCer." I finally went to the DLC site to see what the heck they were talking about. All I found there were some old articles that were out of date. So, I still have no idea what is meant.

What I am is someone who learned a long time ago that the long view was the only view that made sense, and that Republicans move things in the wrong direction...every time. So, that long view, along with progress made in many areas when Democrats held power, means that I support electing Democrats to office whenever it's possible. That's my entire mission. Nothing else.

I will not, and cannot, work against that mission. I never will. Progress is a slow thing in this country. The long view is the only rational view.

[Aramchek]

857. That's one hell of a post. Hail! Hail! the Longviewers

[MineralMan]

890. Thanks. That's very nice of you to say.

[LostinVA]

893. I think people are more concerned with your being a member of FR

[MineralMan]

912. Really? I explain that pretty clearly in my profile.

I was there until 2006, acting as an agent provacateur. After we regained control of the House of Representatives, I wrote a scathing opus and left forever. You can find a copy of that opus here in the DU archives, where someone posted it. Here's a link to the DU thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2705446

I believe this is about the sixth time you or someone else has brought this up. I put that information in my profile on the day I joined DU. Anyone who looks at my profile can see it. Anyone who wants can also read every post I've made on that site. They can also read every post I've made here. I'll stand my my record of posts on both sites. What will you stand on? Insults. Attempts to malign me? Not a good base.

You're welcome to bring it up anytime, and I'll answer you in the same way. Thanks for taking the time to visit my profile.

[Joey Kidd]

1529. "I was there until 2006, acting as an agent provacateur."

And you're pretty good at it over here too.

[MineralMan]

1532. Really? How many of my OPs have you read?

[BootinUp]

1538. didn't know about all that

excellent use of logic in your graceful exit, you broke the no use of logic rule apparently.

[msanthrope]

1312. I am completely unconcerned with his past at FR.

As far as I know, MM never engaged in threads where the sole purpose was to launch coordinated attacks against posters on DU.

Which is more than I can say for some posters here.

[Catherina]

1055. Utter accusatory, embarrassing, destructive partisan rubbish. -1 n/t

[Hekate]

1141. There are some shady characters here. Some have even posted they want to close the BOG....

... because a forum devoted to actually liking the President is "divisive." Who knew?

But perhaps that poster has a point after all: Do our DU Groups need severe pruning? Or perhaps are there suckers growing elsewhere that need to be pruned?

:shrug:

Hekate

[POAS]

1180. Your barking up the wrong tree!..........n/t

[seaglass]

1073. Are you speaking of the unorganized group on IRC Chat? n/t

[POAS]

1178. You fell for that? Really.....n/t

[seaglass]

1583. Are you saying all the participants on that thread are liars? n/t

[CBR]

1210. LOL...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

How is the FOIA request going? Hilarious.

[readmoreoften]

1179. Now THAT's some paranoia...

And what are these "issues" again?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

477. Skinner, leaders make tough choices.

Don't let people kid you - it ain't the economy. Your perceptions are very correct. The problem is that you seem to want to please everyone. You refuse to make choices that will offend some. You have to realize that you can't please everyone.

Heck, just look at the major point of contention around here - President Obama. For many of us, he's doing a great job. For others, well, I'm not going to speak for them, but suffice it to say they've made themselves clear that they don't like him very much. The absolute truth here - and I'm not talking the "TRUTH" that so many people here refer to egotistically - is that there was never a path that Obama was going to follow that would please everyone, or even every person within a subgroup. There was never any chance to please everyone. There is no cake to either have or eat. These are not times for high approval ratings. These are times for anger and punishment, and anyone who steps in the way will get crushed.

It's time for you to make some choices that inevitably will piss off a lot of people. The alternative is to piss off nearly everyone by doing nothing. Look for yourself in this thread - people from ALL sides of this idiotic battle think you've taken the other side! It's insane to think that someone who's sacrificed as much as you have to be considered the monster some of your very own members are making you out to be - and trust me, you wouldn't have to do much digging to find the posts either here or on another wood-based website.

Learn from John Kerry - if you say nothing, people will make up their own narrative. You are currently saying nothing - and look at what you've become to some circles! You're a monster to all and a hero to few. That just ain't right for someone that's dedicated as many years to this as you have, but you have allowed this to happen.

It's time for you to say something. This post wasn't even a start. This wasn't chemotherapy - this was "well, I have a 5-inch lump on my arm - I might have cancer, maybe I should see a doctor, but it can wait." The time for a biopsy is over, Skinner. Your site is about to die and you have to be willing to do something about it.

[depakid]

490. So your suggestion is for an Obama cheerleading site?

An echo chamber- like the one apparently surrounding the president these past 19 moths?

That'll be immensely popular.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

518. Unlike you, I can appreciate a greater good.

If Skinner doesn't make choices that are in line with what I want, hey, it's his site. There are other places for me and places I can go. I'm just not going to donate to a site that makes Obama bashing a welcomed hobby so assholes like you can undermine the progress this country has made and needs to keep making.

And one last note, because you're going straight back on my ignore list after this, you seem to lack a concept of nuance. There's a lot of room between "cheerleading" and "outright bashing." What I do is somewhere in between. What you do definitely lies on the extreme of that spectrum. If you want to be a Pac-Man liberal - someone who goes so far to the left that they reappear on the right - that's your prerogative. I don't need to feed your ego in the process though.

[depakid]

533. Wasn't trying to get personal- though you've certainly answered the question

And as I mentioned- that "solution" would immensely popular... you'd also probably have to change the name of the site.

[potassiumnitrate]

670. This is EXACTLY what I said below

Skinner has to stop fucking around and just pick his side and stick with it.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

1634. Nicholas, in my case it definitely is the economy.

[Motown_Johnny]

482. each of the "two sides" have legitimate points to make

picking a side would be a mistake

I'll agree that there are some growing pains occurring right now but you don't try to stunt growth just to stop growing pains.



I would rather see a new forum (or forums) for people of different opinions to avoid each other than to censor one side of the argument.



just my 2 cents worth

[jaxx]

One thing we all need to remember is that

all the "I's" and all the "You's" equal the "We's". A bunch of Democrats who politick hard and rarely a good loser among us. That goes into the posts, the fights, and the voting. In the end the We is most often a lot bigger than the I and the You. The goal is to elect Democrats and to get things done....and no one is pleased every day with the progress, or lack of on occasion.

Thanks for DU Skinner, it's the only place I've seen on the web that makes sense 90% of the time. That's a pretty good average. :fistbump:

[Cleita]

483. I don't think it's DU.

It's just that many of us don't have the money to donate to you and to their candidate for this election. I have a feeling it's the election that is stiffing you this time around. I myself am squeezing every penny I can to get Barbara Boxer reelected. We just can't have Carly Fiorini as a Senator, yet she has very deep pockets and Barbara is in the fight of her life.

Why not just leave the fund drive open until you have the number of donations you need? Also, as far as changes to DU, the one big one I would do is get rid of that unrec function. People are using it to settle scores instead of the way it was intended. Instead maybe it would be best to make it only work with a post. By that I mean someone has to post why they are unreccing a post before the unrec goes through. I think it would stop the unrec trolls in their tracks.

[alsame]

484. Meaningful and productive discussions are becoming increasingly

difficult because what is considered 'anti-Obama' and 'anti-Dem' expands daily.

Upset with escalation in Afghanistan = anti-Obama
Skeptical about the clean up in the Gulf = anti-Obama
Disappointed with HCR = anti-Obama
Wishing FinReg was stronger = anti-Obama
Pointing out that there are still combat troops in Iraq = anti-Obama

It has become impossible to discuss policy any more because if you do not support EVERY word and action by the Administration and the Democrats in Congress, you are swarmed and attacked by a very organized group of posters.

If we are not allowed to discuss, question and criticize, then DU will just become an echo chamber of DNC/DLC talking points.

[defendandprotect]

939. Exactly ... and humorously when the thread continues to make clear the unhappiness

with the Obama administration, then up with POP a new cheerleading for Obama thread --

sometimes with pics!

People who so identify with a leader seem somewhat obsessed to me -- this is a POLITICIAN,

but they don't seem to be able to digest that news!

I think Skinner really has to encourage them to STOP with the "bashing" claims -- I can

see from this thread the e-mails he must be getting and I sympathize -- and tell them

to get on with debating the ISSUES!!

[Catherina]

1066. You explained it in a nutshell. +1000

I am finding it increasingly difficult to post here because of that and it's causing my to reevaluate many things.

[readmoreoften]

1190. You are correct. If the left gets banned, DU would become a propaganda arm and wither.

Those who are interested in issues, even when they critique Obama don't necessarily agree with one another on solutions. Pluralism exists in-group. But those who see everything as an attack on Obama or, worse, think that Obama shouldn't be criticized would create a pure propaganda arm for the current administration. It'd be pretty empty pretty quick. Nothing but puppy threads and Palin jokes as public education gets axed.

[Autumn]

488. Thank you Skinner, it's the economy

that's one of the reason why I haven't donated. There is quite a bit of contention, but Du is still the best. There seems to be two groups here and each of them can't stand the other voicing an opinion different than theirs so they will try to attack and start a flame war and it seems that it happens on a lot of good threads :tinfoilhat: that should open discussion and instead they get locked. I like Obama, some of what he does pisses me off and then he turns around and does something that makes my heart swell with pride. But in the end I am a Democrat and I will vote for Democratic ideas and values.But I am not going to vote for someone in the Senate or Congress who gets along too damn well with Republicans. That has gotten us where we are today.

[Gman]

496. Skinner, I support you in whatever decisions you make

I agree, this place is not the same. It's like the Primary Wars here paused for the General Election in 2008 then resumed again with even more ferocity once Obama won the election. Less than 48 hours after the election was final, people were slamming him on here for appointing Rahm Emmanuel. I knew at that point it wasn't going to be good. People abruptly ceased supporting the very candidate they so emotionally supported in the primaries.

Things change, organizations grow and morph. That's what is happening to DU. It's just not good right now.

As you say, the true safe haven DU was intended to be is not there any longer. As someone that's been here since almost Day 1 (give or take about 60 days), I've even pointed out to some folks here about the history behind why DU was established. They don't believe me. And that raises another point. Whenever an organization loses sight of it's history, it loses it's direction. Maybe a refresher from some of those old posts from damn near 10 years ago now would help this place find it's bearings again.

But don't forget that many here that think DU is something else were 10, 12 or 14 years old in 2001 and born in the Clinton years. (Sorry, kids! Wisdom comes with age.) Things like Whitewater have little emotional meaning to them. They embrace Ted Olsen for his work with Prop 8 and his statement agreeing with Obama the other day about the NY Islamic Community center. I see a no good sorry bastard that headed the Arkansas Project that damn near brought down Clinton and perjured his ass off to Congress about it without doing jail time. I see someone that I suspect has stage 4 cancer and is trying to get right with God......

I know I've been more than a little intolerant of anyone not supporting Obama these days. I've had some posts rightfully deleted that I knew full well would be deleted when I clicked Post Message. I'm also the resident corporate whore/evil DLC'er that supports the corporate whore evil DLC'er president. Obama may not be perfect president, but dammit he's our president and we damn well better support him.

Skinner, whatever you decide, I support you. And I'll scrounge a few bucks together for the fund drive.

[spanone]

502. read and just donated.....

[guitar man]

503. I'd love to donate

But I'm broke...flat broke...eatin' top ramen and spam broke right now and the spam is the friday night luxury. I haven't had a raise for the last 3 years but Aetna has helped themselves to some hefty raises to keep health coverage, so my sincere apologies that I haven't been able to donate :(

[DevonRex]

506. Is this site pro or con electing Democrats? If you look at GD you wouldn't know.

It has gotten so bad that if Obama backed an encumbant, then people were automatically against that encumbant even after he/she won the primary and felt no compunction about saying that openly and with much contempt.

I use my money to help elect Democrats. At one time DU was such a place. Now I have grave doubts about whether that is true or not. This is a pretty simple thing for me, even if it's not for you.

[libnnc]

508. I've been a member here since 2004 and used to post everyday

I donated and participated regularly. The atmosphere has changed and I no longer feel comfortable being an active part of the DU community.

At this point in the game, I'm a gay woman first and a Democrat second. My community has immediate needs and patience with this administration (and subsequently this specific online community) has long since worn thin.


Don't know what else to tell you, Skinner.

[LostinVA]

517. What you just said

:thumbsup:

[libnnc]

650. Thanks, and in addition...

The way I see things here:

1. There are those who see their participation as nothing more than a political game to win or lose

and

2. There are others whose criticism of the POTUS and his administration comes from having "skin in the game" aka LGBTers, or the unemployed, or the under-insured, etc.

For those of us who are impacted by the decisions/in-decisions of President Obama and Democratic leaders of Congress, our reaction to discussions here are rooted in reality. It isn't a game to us; it's our lives.

To marginalize those criticisms as being counter-productive, IMHO, is the main error here at DU.

[LostinVA]

781. Oh yes, I totally agree with you on that

It's called "Intellectual masturbation."

[drm604]

513. I haven't read the entire, rather large, thread,

but I do think that the economy is a large part of the problem. I do still appreciate DU and I use it nearly every day.

Just to give you an idea of the economic issues: I've struggled for a number of years between unemployment and underemployment. I got one semi-decent job back in March but the company went under at the end of June due to a crooked CEO. Finally a month ago I landed a real job in my field that actually is better than anything I've had in my entire career to date.

In spite of that, I've hesitated to donate, partially because I've acquired the habit of pinching pennies, and partially because I'm paranoid that this job will somehow go sour like the last one. I'm definitely able to give a few bucks but I've been afraid to.

I think that probably says a lot about the economy at large as well as the lack of donations at DU. Even people who are doing well financially are frightened.

That said, since you're not getting much in the way of donations I will probably sit down when I get home tonight and send a small amount your way. It won't be much more than a token, but I do appreciate DU and I should show that appreciation.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

519. "Differences of opinion are what make horse races." Mark Twain

The Left vs Right fights in the Democratic party have been going on since it's inception. It sure as hell isn't going to stop because of "guidelines" or pleas for "unity".

[bigtree]

520. I'm one of the deadbeats

It's truly a money thing. I usually come through sometime after the drive, but many do fall during times when I'm actually OVERdrawn at my bank. It's been unbelievable trying to make ends meet. I haven't paid my website server in months . . . I hate not meeting obligations and debts. I'm sorry I can't be there for you this week. I'll definitely put a couple bucks aside next week to help.

None of the delay is due to any dissatisfaction with DU or anyone here.

[democrank]

521. Thanks for posting this, Skinner.

I donated via snail mail a few days ago but thought long and hard before I did, not because of all the strife here at DU but because times are really, really difficult. I`ll bet there are a lot of DUers in the same boat.

Imagine if you can, that this is Republican Underground, the year is 2007 and George Bush is president. Imagine you are a Republican voter morally opposed to torture and you posted here that you`re sickened by the knowledge your president is allowing people to be tortured. Imagine your reaction if other Republican posters reply that you just want a pony. You expect miracles. You hate Bush. You`re too demanding.You`re too unrealistic.

Here`s where I stand...a DUer since 2003 and a Democrat for going on five decades....I don`t need an ignore button nor do I want to be censored for stating my true beliefs. Democrats do have a big tent but when the status quo dictates that I must vote for a Democrat, even if that person is on a cruise with wealthy bankers in the Caribbean while his constituents are losing their houses right and left, my answer will be a swift and simple, "NO."

We can honestly face what is happening to our country or we can look the other way and make excuse after excuse after excuse. Judging by what`s happening around me, I`d say things are a bit critical. Folks who don`t have enough food or a job aren`t going to skip to the local flower store humming "Everything is Beautiful."

I can`t tell you how many Foreclosure Auction signs there are around here, how many soldiers stuck in Afghanistan, some for the third, fourth, fifth time, how many store fronts boarded up. The poor people I know are hard working and proud and would rather die than take a handout. We MUST do something. DEMOCRATS must do something because the other side, the ones President Obama constantly surrenders to, won`t. Right now, the president is busy trying to prove how many times a week he prays, his answer to the latest Republican smear tactic.The best thing the president could do is tell them to get lost and then busy himself with helping those who really need help. That wouldn`t be AIG.

[raouldukelives]

568. I'm in the same boat

and quite agree with your thoughts.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

666. That is the type of thing I keep hearing

A lot of people are in terrible economic pain, and there is no indication that anyone in Washington cares. If they do care, they aren't making enough noise about it and they're not saying, "The hell with what the Republicans think. We need to do something--and fast."

I've used this example before as an instance in which the Dems fell down on the job, but when I lived in Minnesota in the early 1980s, farm foreclosures were in the news every night. Family farms that had been in the same family for four or five generations were being lost to a double whammy of low crop prices and whopping interest rates, the highest interest rates ever seen outside the Mafia until that point.

So what did the Dems do, even though they still had a majority in Congress?

Nothing. They did nothing.

What could they have done? Offered up a system of low-interest refinancing for troubled farmers. You may or may not know that farmers borrow against the value of their anticipated crops and livestock sales every year. They know how to pay off loans. They would have paid off the new low-interest loans--AND they would have loved the Democrats for another generation.

Yes, Reagan might have vetoed the bill. And then the Dems could have shouted from the rooftops that they wanted to help the farmers but the Republicans were preventing it.

Instead they did nothing, and now the rural areas are solidly in the hands of the Republicans, who at least give lip service to conservative social issues.

Doing nothing when people are suffering is not only immoral--it comes back to bite you. Ask "New Labour" in Britain how being "moderate" helped them.

[Name removed]

523. Deleted message

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

[lamp_shade]

600. Ba-bye corki

[DevonRex]

729. Otherwise known as

Naja.

[blueworld]

527. Here's my egg money, Skinner:)

Not much, but I getcher point. Thanks for DU.

[SanchoPanza]

534. If you want a suggestion on how to improve things...

Get rid of the Recommend and Unrecommend system.

It shouldn't be surprising that you don't get a lot of member support when your main forums have degenerated into a status quo where people think there is a direct relationship between their rec score and the validity of their arguments. There is nothing inherently wrong with disagreement, as you can't reach consensus without disagreement existing beforehand. What is missing here is the middle step; the necessity of convincing others who disagree with you. A few dozen people exclaiming "K&R!" after a topic is posted does not do this. I'm something of a dispassionate oberserver, and this has pretty much been the trend in the main forums since the primaries began. They've become a testament to argumentum ad populum, writ large.

Or, to use a favorite expression of the left in its criticism of right-leaning media, DU is now, for all intents and purposes, an echo chamber. Or a collection of echo chambers, if you prefer. Separating factions, real or imagined, into exclusive forums will not change this. In fact, it would probably make the problem all the more pronounced. Remove the functions that give these echo chambers any meaning and you may actually get somewhere.

[BootinUp]

580. the rec/unrec system

enables posts to elevate to the main page, greatest page etc. I think it is a desireable thing when there are so many threads to wade through. But I understand your point though too, it becomes a competition between factions. Of course that is true. Perhaps there should be a forum without the rec feature for people who are not really into the advocacy thing sometimes as much as the real discussion thing.

[Laelth]

535. First, credit where it is due. You concede that there is a problem. Good.

In order to understand where I am coming from, please reference the following two threads in which I offer my own analysis of the problem and my suggestion for fixing it.

Here, I suggest cloning DU (i.e. splitting it) and accommodating both the party-first crowd and the ideology-first crowd: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/42

Here, I argue that it's impossible to attack policy and not people and that liberals will be driven off the site if they can not criticize Democrats: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/43

You have three options it appears to me.

(1) Keep this site Democratic Underground with a big D and make it a site where partisans are welcome and liberals/leftists are not. This is the path that, it appears to me, you have chosen, and it is leading to the destruction of the site because, for years, DU was the premier liberal American internet website, as evidenced by the fact that we regularly elect Dennis Kucinich for President. We are not mainstream Democrats, for the most part. Most of us are liberals who are not terribly loyal to the Democratic Party, and many of us no longer feel safe or welcome here.

(2) Clone DU, as I suggested above and cater to both groups.

(3) Make DU dEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND with a small "d." Allow attacks on Democrats. Allow people to call the President nasty names when he acts like a conservative. Make it clear that this site is a place for people who share liberal/leftist ideology, and not a place for partisans. The partisans, after all, have plenty of boring sites where they can post and all agree with one another--towing the party line. For years, DU wasn't like that. Attacks (and I mean vicious attacks) on conservative Democrats were allowed. Now, they're not. As such, liberals are leaving, and people are not donating.

Yes, there are two groups here, but it appears the liberals and leftists (the ideology-first crowd) significantly outnumber the partisans (the party-first crowd). Look at whose posts are more likely to reach the top of the Greatest Page. If that's any indication, the ideology-first crowd far outnumbers the partisans. Contributions are suffering because the ideology-first crowd no longer feels welcome here, but they still constitute the greater number of the site's visitors and posters. It's up to you which group you want to please, but it's clear, finally, that you can't please both. I, for one, suggest that we ideology-first posters are the vast majority here. Whether to appeal to us or the partisans is the decision that you and your partners must make.

Good luck.

-Laelth

[Aleric]

604. Very objective and extremely well put

Thank you. If only I could maintain that level of rationality when I come here.

[Laelth]

625. My pleasure. (Laelth bows.) n/t

-Laelth

[jannyk]

1042. well done Laelth!

[Laelth]

1116. Thanks. I hope it does some good. n/t

-Laelth

[Catherina]

1076. Excellent post. I wish I could recommend it over and over again

Sinner, like Obama, you are losing the populist base that made things happen for you.

[Laelth]

1117. You're very kind. Thanks. n/t

-Laelth

[NorthCarolina]

1300. Well said. That sums up my view of the issue very well. eom

[bobbolink]

536. I have thought many times of suggesting this to you, but given that I knew I wouldn't get a reply,

even an acknowledgement of having sent anything, I didn't try.

So, since you are now admitting that things are very rocky, and you are reaching for some new ways of thinking, here is my suggestion:

Read "The Different Drum", by Scott Peck. He and his wife have made community building their life's work. They know what real community is, and how it is achieved.

Then, have the rest of the admins and the mods reac it. Hey, if you want to do something radical, have the Pecks do a community-building workshop with all of you!

With a different understanding of community, maybe some real changes could actually be achieved.

respectfully,

bobbolink

[Little Star]

730. Bobbolink, I have long admired M. Scott Peck's Books!

Did you know that he passed away in 2005? I have read all of his books and think there are a lot of learning lessons in them. Just wanted to let you know I liked your suggestion.

LS

[flyarm]

538. The problem here as I see it and most of my friends that used to post here and no longer even come

here is ..you have a group of du'ers that are bullies..they bully others..and adults do not take kindly to that! Many of us have raised kids and have taught our own children that Bullying is wrong and unacceptable.

And yet anymore when one comes to DU there is bullying to such a degree one feels the need to wash after being attacked by said bullies!

The bullies are never held accountable..they bully day in and day out..and never have their posts removed and never get tossed for such abhorrent behavior!!

When i come here and feel as though I am dealing with Freepers..and my blood pressure is raised to a point I get so angry I respond in kind..this is not a place I enjoy coming to anymore.

In fact I find myself coming here less and less!

I have seen Long time DU'ers that I respect their opinions and their research get attacked and smeared and tag teamed by a certain group.

You know what that group is Skinner..we all do! It is very apparent who they are. And yet they bully day in and day out with no accountability!

Rules have been changed to appease a small minority group. Most of us are very aware of that.

That is all I have to say about it , other than My constitution demands that I hold everyone in my government accountable.. The constitution tells me I AM THE GOVERNMENT...if I can not do that here, with truth and honesty without being attacked daily..then that leaves me little time for DU.

I do not like having to self censor myself.it is a damn lousy feeling!

I don't like bullies, I worked damn hard teaching my children to never be a bully and to care about others, and help others not as fortunate as ourselves and to respect the opinion of others! I am an adult who has worked with and for the dem party for 40 years, I don't need to come here and deal with childish bully's who THINK they can tell me what to expect from my party and who THINK their propaganda is acceptable to other adults, and who play games and tag team others trying to get them tossed. That is unacceptable to most adults I would hope! And it seems it is unacceptable to the majority of posters here at DU. The frustrations by the majority here at DU are obvious. And a minority here at DU are running roughshot over most of the boards and insulting most of us!

Most people don"t want to come where they repeatedly are insulted, both verbally and intellectually.


This is my opinion.

[Ignis]

955. "The bullies are never held accountable"

That's the core problem for me, as well. It's incredibly frustrating to watch bulletproof posters thumb their noses at the rules repeatedly without any action being taken.

I try to be a "good citizen" at DU and alert on obvious personal attacks, but there's a clear pattern of deletions that seem to skip the repeat offenders flyarm mentions--or the entire sub-thread is nuked, taking the wheat with the chaff.

I've started using Ignore against some of the posters who appear to be allowed to make personal attacks with impunity, but the problem needs to be fixed at the root.

[bobbolink]

1127. Bullies rule here... especially when they have a "name" and $$$$

[etherealtruth]

1569. You've identified why I don't hang out here much

I respect differences of opinion, I adore fresh and new perspectives .... I can be persuaded to change my perspective ... You've identified why I don't visit much ... why after years of posting I had to utilize the ignore function ...

Its too bad

[in_cog_ni_to]

1757. THAT is why I always liked you! You always say it like it is.

I rarely post on this site either and stop by only every few months or so. The hatred here just turned me off completely. The last time I was here, I read a post about how ridiculous it is that college graduates have no job and are living at home with mom and dad. "Why can't they get a job and stop mooching off mommy and daddy?" That sounded a little freepish to me! Isn't that what Repukes are always preaching? "Pull yourself up by your bootstrap!" That's not anything a Liberal would EVER think or say....at least not THIS Liberal. And, HELLO! the economy SUCKS! It's not just college Grads who can't find a damn job, it's MILLIONS of adults. My doors will ALWAYS be open to my son....no matter how old he is. Thank you very much. I read that thread and left, AGAIN pissed off.

I use to have withdrawals from DU. I remember when my password wouldn't work for a few hours.....it was pure HELL. Not anymore. The last Presidential election sent me out of here without looking back, but my blood pressure LOVED it. The Israeli (supposedly, "Zionist"...which I think is pure BULL and something to hide behind) hatred here is disgusting to me too. MANY Jews have left/RAN from this site.

DU is NOT the same DU it was. I was here the first week it went online. DU has changed...and not NOT for the better. It's sad, but I got over it.

[inna]

547. "to give the community the ability to police itself and set its own limits" - EXCELLENT idea!

Would you guys at least consider giving it a try? Why not establish a censorship-free subforum?

It's not clear at all why DU feels "obligated to censor people" in the first place (presumably, meaning left-wing/progressive critics = "Old Dems" as opposed to "New Dems"); the entire left-leaning blogosphere is chock full of "liberal dissent". The worst thing you guys can do, in my opinion, would be to crack down on (left-leaning) dissent and intensify censorship; that would effectively kill the board in terms of being a "liberal/progressive haven".


"I am starting to think that much more radical change is necessary"...

"justification to experiment with some really radical changes to this place"...

- Wow, that sounds pretty intense and drastic. What kind of "radical change" are you considering and what is the motivation? If your intention is to increase donations, that might be difficult to do in this kind of economy anyway; the low output is most likely a result of the economy and drastically reduced consumer spending, rather than an effect of some internal board politics.



"I feel obligated to censor people"

"I feel obligated to keep deleting posts and banning people"

Dear Skinner, but you really shouldn't feel "obligated" to do all those things!!! Obligated to whom?? Censorship and banning people is NOT a good thing; it's certainly not what the DU community wants. (Not to speak for anyone else, but try taking a poll if you want democratic public opinion on this issue, seriously.) More censorship and more banning is a prescription for a disaster (as far as online forums go), not the solution to the (perceived) problem/"crisis". I certainly hope that purging this board of liberal/progressive dissent and left-leaning criticism is not your guys' idea of "some really radical changes". (But it is exceedingly clear that this is what a small but very vocal group of posters are calling for.)

[Shrek]

553. Thank you for this post

You echo my feelings exactly.

I used to be a regular donor but I stopped BECAUSE of the censorship. It should be eliminated, not increased. Let people post as they will and I'll be back on board as a donor.

[woo me with science]

757. [phone] nt

[Catherina]

1079. +100,000! n/t

[asdjrocky]

550. There are a handful of posters who are dedicated to the DLC line-

and they've made it nearly impossible for people to have real conversations here. Maybe like a dozen people.

The problem is, they stay and real liberals or leftists, who are also Dems, get frustrated at the impunity that they seem to operate under. Many of us are going through hard times, many of us have legitimate complaints, and we are called haters for our point of view. This is high school shit, and anyone should be able to see it.

I know for a fact, from a personal perspective, that there are many, many good people here. They are being drowned out by a few over-the-top voices. Look at it objectively and you'll see this. It's the same names every time, and they keep on coming.

It really is that simple. I've seen too many good friends go by the way-side, while the rudeness, nastiness, and meanness continues unabated.

Just my take.

[Lemonwurst]

555. The "new" DU is still important, at least to me

Sure, I don't post much. There's not much I can say when someone else has already said it in so many words.

All the complaining that's taken hold of late, which oddly can include valid points made on both sides of an argument, is still healthy discourse if one can keep their emotions in check.

Of course that's not always easy, and with online forums, not even necessary. But I still love this place because it handily fills the void that's left by typical media outlets, which I abhor and have for more than a decade.

DU is still very good for many of us. Nothing anyone writes bothers me, because it doesn't have to. I think it was Eleanor Roosevelt who said, no one can make you feel bad without your permission.

There's a tremendous amount of work to be done. Let's not spend our energy spinning our wheels. We are all still one big dysfunctional but well-intentioned family.

[nadinbrzezinski]

559. Well I wasn't going to give due to the economy

we have worries...

But I just did... give a little.

I thought I'd wait until at least next year.

And yes there is a reason why this place is not what it used to be, but it is still home.

But for us, it was TRULY economic.

[WheelWalker]

565. I agree... I don't believe the issue is primarily financial for DU donors...

It is apparent that DU grows increasingly polarized. In my view, the issue for DU governance mirrors the larger political issue for our party: How do we achieve idealistic goals while applying pragmatic and sensible solutions?

The first difficulty is to see that the problem is difficult.

[boston bean]

587. Let the people who are pushing for the change fight for it.

They shouldn't be told to sit down and shut up and get in line.

They are of course working for a change most believe in.

[WheelWalker]

621. I can't disagree with any of that. Then, too,

let's not tell those who see value in incremental progress to get out of the way. Both approaches further change. When you're On the Threshold of a Dream, it's A Question of Balance.

[boston bean]

669. problem is the discussion doesn't take place around the issue

if you are critical you are sooner or later labeled a rwer or an obama hater, or a purist, or an idealist, or a cynic.

And when the issue is discussed they agree in principle, but still make snyde remarks because it makes obama look bad.

I just don't know what to say to it, or how to deal with it.

[WheelWalker]

711. Yes. I, for one, believe that diversity furthers change, while

cynicism and intolerance stunt progress. We can give each other a hand and all make it; or, we can pull each other under and all drown is our righteousness.

[boston bean]

1481. I'm not exactly sure how to interpret your last response

Just who is it you are calling intolerant or cynical. All I know is I that I responded to you that is how someone like me is described.

It was nice talking to you, but I think you've just proven the point.

But then again, I could be wrong, because I really don't get the response in light of your previous post to me.

Have a good day.

[Mimosa]

1290. Money IS a problem for many

I've been on DU off and on since early 2003. This last year ( nearly 2 years) there have been many posts and topics about people having hard times, losing jobs, feeling terrible.

I think this in part is also causing the disagreements about policies.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

573. I have been unemployed since January. I can't give.

[Webster Green]

574. Raffle off some more netbooks and stuff.

It won't solve the divisiveness problem on DU, but those goodies were great incentive to donate more. :P

[Paper Roses]

577. I have never had much to give but under my old name and new,

I have given what I can. I have also given a star to some in need if I had a few extra dollars. This time, I cannot do it. Do you know how badly this makes me feel?

I have, on other occasions, been able to donate a star to someone like me. My star goes for a while longer and when it is up for renewal, I will find somehow to scrounge up some funds.

I am so sorry that I cannot join in the quarterly fund raising. Social Security goes only so far--really not very far. I had to pay my house taxes August 1st. That has left me with zilch in the bank.

I hope that some DUers can fill in the gaps that the rest of us cannot. Never in my life have I been in a situation like this----And it is an old life. I am pre-baby-boomer. I know how hard you all work to keep this site running. Next time, I hope I can say I was a part.

PR

[Born_A_Truman]

581. My star expired ...

"Imagine if during the Bush Obama Administration, Democratic Underground had welcomed people who thought the president was doing a bad job, *and* people who thought the president was doing a good job. DU would have sucked. Sure, it might have been worth the effort to stop by every once in a while to argue with conservative idiots, but nobody would have felt like DU was their home, their safe-haven, their community."

Imagine.

[steve2470]

589. Skinner, thank you so much for this site

I know running it is very hard, and I appreciate what you and the other admins do.

I think the answer is two-fold: a) maybe a minor fund drive every month to help people budget; and b) perhaps defining a tad more clearly what is non-constructive dialogue.

Thank you again for a site which has educated me so much.

[Capitalocracy]

591. Dialogue between these two factions should be facilitated, not eliminated...

I think it's good to have a forum for working out these differences, because this split is such an important issue that it needs to be addressed. Not necessarily resolved, not necessarily eliminated, one side doesn't necessarily need to win over the other. I think the Democratic Party needs its cheerleaders AND its naysayers to stay active, stay strong, and stay focused on winning elections while being pressured to do something important after winning.

What would be better would be if we could work out these differences in a more civil manner. I think rules enforcement should be more focused on facilitating and moderating this dialogue between these two factions than eliminating it.

And I didn't give, I'm sure like many others, due to my severely difficult financial situation at the moment. I actually would have given if I could, and I hope to be able to in the future. Someone donated on my behalf. Huge thanks to whoever that was. :toast:

[Gidney N Cloyd]

593. A Mob Mentality has developed here. It started in the primaries.

And there's more than one mob. What this site needs is a "slaughter rule" like in little league. When the pile-on starts, lock the thread. When an OP gets the mob treatment, the thread gets tedious and other compelling threads competing for attention get lost in the din.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

875. God no... that would become the objective

The mob treatment is often accompanied by mob alerts... it's often an attempt to get a thread locked

Giving the mob a numerical goal to shoot for would exacerbate the problem

[Gidney N Cloyd]

942. I suppose you're right.

[Boojatta]

596. "We're not going to reach our goal this fund drive."

This whole thread seems to be based on an error, and I think that I've found the error.

(On the other hand, by posting the statement, Skinner may have ensured that it became false.)

[Greyhound]

736. !

:think:

[potassiumnitrate]

598. Just pick a side. Stop being so nice.

I registered solely to say this.

You're just being too accomadating is all. Trying to get everyone to "get along" as if that were at all possible.

Pick a side and stick to it. Enforce that side with an iron fist and ban everyone else. Sure, they'll bitch about it. So what? They can go find another website if they're so unhappy. Fuck em. It's YOUR site. Nobody is forcing them to come here. If they're unhappy, they can leave.

It's all there, in black and white:

Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office.

That's your side. Period, end of story.

If people don't want to support the Democrat, they can go to any of the other zillion message boards out there to bitch. It's one thing to say "I don't like the way Obama is doing this or that but I'll vote for him" and quite another to say "I'm not supporting Obama at all unless he does this or that and the other!".

Ban the latter.

[Downwinder]

599. On a Social Security budget I have to plan very carefully.

Any budgeted expenditure has to be saved at the dinner table since food is my only flexible expense. I was not sending a message, I wait to make expenditures when I have the funds to do so. Perhaps I should budget for donations, but then it becomes an obligation and to me the sacrifice for a donation means more.

I am very happy with DU as it was, is, and will be. Be assured, if I have a complain with DU, I like everyone else will sound off. I have noticed that we are a pretty out spoken assemblage.

I sent a check yesterday so my donation is not a result of this post. Again, it is strictly controlled by my appetite.

On edit: What a boring place the world would be if everybody was the same. Also, you should find some way to bill Medicare, DU is very therapeutic.

[blueworld]

603. I can't afford it, but I contributed a small amount anyway.

I'm sorry it can't be more, but that's the way it is. I can't contribute the dollar amount I believe DU deserves; it's been a wonderful community for years. For myself, I've noticed a lot more ugliness over the last months, as I've posted before. Like others, I never used the "Ignore" function until last year.

It seems likely there are GOP trolls here. I don't envy the job you have; I'm grateful for what you've created; I will respect your decisions whatever they are. But I can't & won't ever be a Democratic Party lock-step marcher.

I enjoy debate. I learn from arguments. Not necessarily gracefully, usually not immediately. But after I get my knickers in a knot & go away to sulk, I also think. And I've always come back because I felt that this was a healthy environment for that type of "working things through". I like to think that some on the other end of the debate may have gained a little wisdom from something I wrote as well.

I hope DU will continue to be the excellent forum it has been in the past. You're all top-notch:)

[Mugweed]

607. Actually, I'm just broke like nobody's business at the moment.

The fact that I have the time to read and respond to posts during the middle of a weekday shows how much my work hours, and resulting pay, have been reduced.

[Capitalocracy]

611. You and me both, my friend.

I think the economy has more to do with this than Skinner thinks. :shrug:

[WillyT]

610. Skinner... I Get Paid Once A Month, On The First...

You will be getting my donation shortly thereafter.

I still love the DU.

But I'd recommend taking out the Unrec feature.

I think it causes more more damage than any good it does. And it has gotten too personal as of late.

There are many reasons why a post might make it to the greatest page, other than being some well reasoned, cogently argued post.

Sometimes it's just an informational post that people feel needs wider viewing...

Deaths or illnesses of fellow DUers, upcoming protests/events, pure hilarity... just to name a few.

Unrec has become the "I Disapprove!" button at DU (to put it "nicely"), and it reinforces some of the negativity around here I believe.

Anywho... just my two cents.

And again... money coming to ya after the first of September.

Thanks for all your hard work,

WillyT

:hi:

[Botany]

612. Skinner & Company

You have done damn good work in setting up and running DU. Overall D.U. is a force for good
and the people who post here are great. Funny of the people I have had to put on ignore they
all wound up getting tombstoned.

You should be proud of your offspring in DU ... even if we break windows and drink milk right from the jug.


I feel shamed I haven't given anything this drive but when I get my new bank debit card I will
send you a little $ ...... till then I sit in shame.

[mzmolly]

613. "nobody would have felt like DU was their home, their safe-haven, their community."

:( You summed up feelings perfectly. I'm so sorry that you're struggling right now Skinner. You lay awake because you have integrity and you care about the membership here.

I wish you the best of luck in future decisions about the board.

[Botany]

614. Skinner & Company

You have done damn good work in setting up and running DU. Overall D.U. is a force for good
and the people who post here are great. Funny of the people I have had to put on ignore they
all wound up getting tombstoned.

You should be proud of your offspring in DU ... even if we break windows and drink milk right from the jug.


I feel shamed I haven't given anything this drive but when I get my new bank debit card I will
send you a little $ ...... till then I sit in shame.

[polichick]

615. Here's my two cents:

My interest in the party and in this site has to do with policy, not individuals. Though I have donated to DU each year, I rarely post anymore - and it's not just all the creepy right-wing ads that inspire me to log out. My interest first began to wane with the purging of lgbt members - and I continued to lose interest as additional principled and thoughtful members of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party were purged.

Dear Skinner - if you really want to see where the site has gone wrong, please make a list of all the members purged in the last year and pay attention to where they stand politically. My guess is the list will look similar to the list of Dems trashed by members of the administration.



(Edited "creepy")

[VMI Dem]

622. +1.

[EFerrari]

638. You know that you can turn off the ads as a donor, right?

[polichick]

643. I've never blocked my view of anything or anybody here...

It's good to know what's going on.

[Renew Deal]

692. I guess, but those ads are pretty annoying,

I don't think you gain anything from them.

[polichick]

722. Well, it's interesting that they're here at all...

...both from the standpoint of DU fundraising and from the standpoint of Republican outreach.

I have to wonder how much money it takes to run a site like this - is it necessary to ask for donations AND run Republican ads?

I also wonder who Toomey and other right-wingers think they're reaching by placing ads here.

[Renew Deal]

794. Republicans don't place ads here.

An automated system places ads based on terms used on the site. DU tries to filter out republican ads, but some sneak through (mostly Toomey).

[polichick]

811. It depends on what the purchaser chooses...

Placement can be based on keywords, and you can also list sites you want included. (I looked into it for a GOTV project.)

As creepy as they are, sometimes I get a laugh out of them. I especially like Toomey's "SESTAK=PELOSI" - we should be so lucky!

[CreekDog]

646. Your comments on membership are worth noting

I hope folks didn't miss what you wrote while scrolling.

[polichick]

726. Thanks! I hope it doesn't get deleted. nt

[LostinVA]

739. I was literally just thinking about you five minutes ago

And, how, like Creekdog, we knocked heads during the Primaries, but then learned to respect and like one another.

Thanks for acknowledging the purge of GLBT members and allies.

:pals:

[polichick]

770. Hi LIV :)

It's great to see you! :pals:

[LostinVA]

809. You too!

:pals:

[LostinVA]

740. +1

[asdjrocky]

789. You hit the nail on the head.

There seem to be two standards here at DU, the division is clear, and the direction is suspect.

[LostinVA]

812. On correction

Since April 2009, not just the last year.

[polichick]

816. Thanks - I was thinking it might be longer. Make that 18 months! nt

[Catherina]

1083. +1 n/t

[DirkGently]

624. Just an 800+ post newbie, but I doubt the "war" is the $ problem

As someone noted, controversy drives discussion boards.

Query for the administrators: Is *traffic* actually down?

I would think all the frantic back-and-forth would churn posts, although at some point, people probably do get a bad taste in their mouth or need to take a break. I suspect that financial considerations, rather than disapproval of the way the site is going, is to blame for the fund drive problem. No easy answer there.

I DO think people like recognition, like stars or the Valentine's hearts, which appeared to me to be a big hit. Free for the site, but packing a lot of emotional payoff for the members. The notion of bestowing a gift on another member, visible to the entire forum, seemed to strike a chord with people. It did with me.

As for the factional "war," which has become so hotly debated that I will not even try to characterize it, I think it does degrade the experience here, but I don't think separating the cats from the dogs, as it were, will make anyone happier. There is already a sub-forum granting the wish to exclude one set of opinions, and it appears to be poorly attended and prone to ... complaints about the other forums.

I'd focus on limiting negativity toward other members, rather than trying to appease *anyone's* desire to banish those they disagree with. In my opinion, that is a weak approach that if pursued, just exacerbates bad feeling, and will result in a bland forum (or two equally bland forums).

*Neg-recc'ing* is the weapon of choice in this war. BAN IT. There should be *no* weapons here to use on other members. A positive vote is a positive thing. A lack of positive votes speaks for itself, but harms no one. A negative vote, on the other hand, is an attack used to silence the opposition, which is demeaning to both those who use it and those who experience it, and encourages reprisal and revenge.

I wouldn't censor more. It's contrary to progressive ideas and opens the site to ridicule from its outside detractors. If it's going to happen anyway, I'd suggest a politically neutral ban on purely negative comments of any kind. "This sucks, I'm neg recc'ing you" and its equivalents, bereft of any constructive thought or analysis, helps no one, makes no point, and just poisons the atmosphere. If there are "trolls and moles" of any kind here, I would think the substance free, drive-by snark probably identifies them better than anything.

Just my thoughts. I've enjoyed the site and the wide range of intelligent, well-meaning people here.

[nashville_brook]

1047. a LOT of this trouble started with the introduction of UNREC -- it sows ill-will

[DirkGently]

1134. I keep hearing that ...

[nashville_brook]

1193. you know how people bring beach balls to concerts?

do a search back into some threads from a few years ago and maybe check some top-voted threads. there was more of a feeling like when you're at a concert and someone throws a frisbee or a beach ball and everyone cooperates to keep it up in the air.

now imagine if at a concert someone playfully tossed a beach ball...which they thought about enough to smuggle in, btw...and they blow it up, excited to see where it goes and how long it lasts...and the 3rd person who it went to, they used their cigar to burn a hole in it -- then looked at you and sneered. or worse, called you names for bringing that stupid ball to the show.

that's what we have now. we've gone from Phish to GWAR. and there's some people here who think it's a damn Celine Dion show. okay, now i'm just being absurd -- i have no idea how Celine Dion fits in here.

[DirkGently]

1208. Wow -- that's a really vivid explanation. And I agree.

[VMI Dem]

628. I've seen outspoken liberals banned. I've seen members of a certain minority banned. Yet...

I still see the same group of hateful, name-calling, abusive posters day after day in threads. Whether making personal attacks in threads, or ridiculing other groups, they are still here. I'm not talking about those I personally disagree with, in come cases vehemently. I'm talking about those that constantly attack other DU'ers with hateful rhetoric and yet are allowed to remain.

[saracat]

630. Skinner You nailed it with the lack of community. There is a lack of "respect"

on this board that goes beyond politics. There are several members who are completely abusive and continually seem to be allowed to do so. The complete lack of empathy among some who claim to be supportive of the current Admin is stunning. Never before on DU have I seen the plight of the unemployed, those sickened in the Gulf, and the LBGT Community consistently "mocked" by some. Recently several unpleasant posts appeared concerning folks on food stamps! Whats next? Social Security recipients will be labeled grifters? I personally was mocked about my own situation with health insurance by several of the posters in this very thread.One of them attacked me in the vilests misogynistic manner I have ever seen and yet suffered no consequences. This is neither "Democratic", or "Underground"! While I have noticed a great improvement on some moderation, too often remarks such as those are left up.Posts "calling out " other members are left to remain as OP's in flagrant violation of the rules. None of this is about pro-Obama, or anti Obama. This is just nasty.

Not long ago a member was shredded for having been trapped overseas by the volcano! An academic , he was derided for having gone to Europe to being with.It is inferred and sometimes stated that our members who live on the Gulf are "lying" when they say their conditions are NOT improving and they are scared. There was a time we would have empathized with those people.
And yet there is still a spark here. This was proved last week when members united behind a DU er who needed dental work. We CAN still come together but we need to demand some sort of respect, and despite whatever whatever claims that are made a very loud vocal and vicious minority should not be allowed to indulge in attack dog behavior because they assume they have some sort of "protected" status.

What used to unite us on Democratic Underground was shared values. I do not see the current conflict on this board as about a politician but a lack of shared values. Perhaps if we had some rules for "empathy", crazy as that sounds. The very least I would expect from a Democratic site is respect for humanity, and there are some here who are totally devoid of that quality.

[EFerrari]

654. If DU is to survive as a community, then community needs to take priority. n/t

[saracat]

702. One simple rule"People before politics" and certainly people before politcians.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

1078. Agree!Did you know there are even websites, w/DU members, whose purpose is to disrupt our community?

They have a lack of respect for our DU community. Right on, saracat.

[CBR]

1211. +1 It is horrible. They make fun of members' looks

in their signature photos, claim people have a mental illness and generally badmouth members here including the admin. Very nasty stuff. I hope civility and respect is restored.

[saracat]

1455. If some do, at least they post it publicly as opposed to hiding in a protected

forum or chat room.

[Violet_Crumble]

1469. Is that supposed to make what they do somehow acceptable?

And there's no 'if' about it. I've seen it happen. Will you be needing me to PM you a link to the forum it happens on? I didn't think you'd need directions, seeing yr a mod there :)

[saracat]

1473. As I am sure you are aware, remarks made in a forum that does not censor

have nothing to do with the personal opinion of a mod. The fact it may have been done is irrelevant. As to acceptable? To whom? It is free speech and said publicly. I have read similar comments elsewhere that are deemed private. Is that acceptable? It is simply not relevant. But it is preferable to be upfront than hiding. Neither is good but both exist and are beyond control.

[Violet_Crumble]

1506. Why do you keep on saying it *may* have happened when you are very aware it has definately happened?

For the record, I didn't say you shared those views. I was suprised that with yr use of the word *may*, you were acting as though there was some sort of doubt as to whether some really nasty and ugly things have been said on another forum about DUers, when you've seen exactly what's been said and know it definately happens, seeing as how yr a mod there...

I don't find the ugly crap said about other DUers acceptable, and it doesn't matter whether it's the forum yr talking about, or the one that exists where former and present DUers say really revolting things about me and other DUers who are pro-Palestinian. It's revolting and immature and says far more about the ugliness of the person doing it than of the people it's aimed at...

[saracat]

1592. What I am saying is two wrongs don't make a right.

I have no obligation to confirm or deny anything about other sites.I am speaking generically.One side of this issue regularly calls out another for what they themselves do and that is also "unacceptable". That being said, both sides exist and there is nothing to be done about it. Two wrongs will never make a right.

[Violet_Crumble]

1631. And what I'm saying is that yr coming across as evasive saying 'may'

No-one's asking you to confirm or deny anything. I know you've seen something happen, so for you to tell another poster it *may* have happened is just a bit evasive, imo. And for the record, some of the people who've had the most revolting things said about them at the site you moderate at have not done the same thing, so please don't pretend that they have...

[saracat]

1643. I wouldn't bet the farm on that but whatever. Each to their own.

We will have to disagree on this.

[Violet_Crumble]

1656. I would. Feel free to show me proof to the contrary...

I know of at least one good DUer who's been attacked in a really nasty way who has NEVER said anything nasty about any of you. But if you feel you can prove otherwise, go ahead. I'd be interested to see...

[saracat]

1684. Sure, as you say. Whatever.

[Violet_Crumble]

1702. So, no evidence of what you claim is forthcoming? I'm not surprised...

I checked and you haven't PMed me with any links to evidence, but I'm sure if what you claim exists, you'll be very eager to share it :)

[cornermouse]

1732. For you Violet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cP26ndrmtg&feature=av2n

[saracat]

1459. Whose purpose is to disrupt the DU Community? That is delusional.

DU is entertainment. There is no reason to disrupt it. If anyone takes any kind of website that seriously... I don't understand. Then again, others take things more seriously I suppose. The real work of polotics is not done here or on any website.It is done in the trenches. Keyboard warriors do not count for anything in RL.

[bobbolink]

1158. You're so right, sara! Lack of respect, lack of empathy, lack of traditional Dem sensitivity.

For a long time, the rule here is that whoever can cut someone off at the knees in the cleverest way wins. That may be the "in" thing for young, white males, but community it does not make.

One clue to this? I noticed a very long time ago that if I wanted to say something personally snarky, there were plenty of emoticons to choose from. However, if I wanted to thank someone, or to express appreciation, there are very FEW emoticons. I found myself using the same one over and over and over.

While that sounds minor, I think it points to a basic problem, at the basic level... the administration. It shows where their collective heads are at.

[Daemonaquila]

631. Change is OK - can't have what was, must find a new balance

The thing you said that resonates most, above, is the overwhelming desire to get back the community DU was in the "good old days." I know that pain - I've also built organizations, teams, and so on, and as people and circumstances have changed, I've found myself wishing to get back to a time when things were so friendly and working so sweetly. But hey, it ain't gonna happen. The best we can ever hope for is finding a new, different sweet spot. To get there, all a person can do is embrace change and work to find a new balance that may be entirely different from what they envision. Sometimes the new sweet spot is surprising and really bizarrely different, and even better than the one we long for.

I am one of the people who walked away from DU when the new rules were announced. A community where respectful language toward our president, etc., is ENFORCED is not a community I'm interested in being part of. Rules of etiquette that really are rules regarding what ideas and feelings can be discussed destroy the point of the conversation and the community, unless the community is just intended to be a mere safe space/kaffe klatsch for certain ideologies. It is certainly antithetical to building and supporting the party as it goes through inevitable growing pains after it finally came to power for the first time in many years.

DU is a microcosm of the Democratic Party. That means that it's populated with everyone from hard core blue dogs to disaffected Greens, just like any Democratic caucus or convention. A convention is going to have strong words, floor fights, anger, passion, strange tangents, tears, the works - I can't see how DU can be any different than that, yet be a place for all Democrats to gather and talk about the things that allow the party to grow, change, and hopefully thrive. Trying to stifle the rawest part of the discussion (aside from blowing the whistle on serious personal attacks, hate speech, thrown punches, threats that might just be acted on, etc.) does create a place where only a certain spectrum of ideology may be debated. That's neither reasonable nor good for eventually letting people reach consensus where it's possible, or at least reaching alliances from which to work on issues where no meeting of the minds will occur.

You're very wrong in one point you're making above. You can not liken the dissent over Obama's and other Dem politicians' worth to letting Bush supporters onto the board prior to the election. The republicans and their policies are the enemy. But there are lots of Dems who are not happy with their party or certain Dem politicians right now, but who still fundamentally love the party. That's just a fact of life - another floor fight at the convention by people who ALL CARE ABOUT THE PARTY ENOUGH TO BE PASSIONATE ABOUT THEIR DISAGREEMENTS AS TO WHAT IT NEEDS TO DO TO IMPROVE. They could walk away. They don't. The arguments aren't about hating on the party or the president, but about love for the party's ideals - even if some people think it's a tough love like getting on uncle Bob to quit getting drunk and throwing up in the corner at Thanksgiving dinner.

One last thought along those lines... The words "Teabagger Takedown" title for the fund drive (while a lovely thought!) mirrors the fatal flaw that is causing the fund drive to fail. When Kerry was running, Dem fundraisers on the street didn't approach people to talk about their exciting candidate - they asked people if they wanted to help defeat Bush. During the Bush years, the party mistakenly rallied around WHAT IT WASN'T; it was the party of "we're not Bush." However, in being the party of "we're not Bush," the party let slide the message - and its own internal sense - of what is stands FOR. So, here we are. We have the White House and the House and the Senate, and we're not getting very far with that. The Dems have to do the much, much harder work - too late, probably - of deciding what they stand for and making it stick. The fractious debates on DU are part of that painful process.

Let it happen. Break up the fights that get too violent. Understand that the process is going to hurt. Trust that people will work it out eventually, and the party will be better for it.

[CreekDog]

632. a lot of people donated during the incredibly nasty primaries

so nastiness is not alone the explanation.

in a way this was a different "community" a few years ago, i think a lot more diverse than it is now.

one thing reducing the diversity is when we lose people because they don't agree with Obama but they are doing so by *taking the liberal position*. is it fair to say that we've lost entire segments of our membership over this sort of thing?

how can DU be what it was without the people who made it that way --without that thinking and those values? can you bring some of that (them) back? yes.

so, now it seems like a slugfest between probably mostly disappointed very liberals who express their disappointment and other disappointed liberals who think Obama needs our support to do better. there's no reconciling that and you don't need to do that either --you just need to give it a place to be fought and thought out.

face this: when DU was at its heyday, it was a VERY liberal, VERY activist place, of course with its share of centrists and conservative dems. such a group of people are going to be hard to please no matter what, and right now, they are complaining. let them do that here in strong terms --Obama's a grown-up, he can defend himself.

[saracat]

676. +1000

[Raven]

633. A SHAMELESS ploy....

to get me to do what I should have done days ago. DU will make it, Skinner. We are all we've got and we'd better stick together. Anyway, politics aside, I couldn't live without my LOLCats fix every Sunday. :-)

[John Q. Citizen]

635. I don't worry that it's all changed. It really hasn't for me. I like it just as much as ever.

i don't feel at all divided with my fellow liberal lefties.

It's just the same as it always was.

There have always been people in the Democratic Party that i liked and people who I can't stand. Same with the Greens and the Libertarians and the Republicans.



Just because we "may" be on the same side politically doesn't mean that our personalities won't clash. So there will always be some friction just because we are humans and humans experience friction in communities. Of course, the less the better generally.



In many ways you eat breath sleep this community, and i come and go, sometimes for long times. So my perspective is a little different.

My advice is to take a sabbatical for a month, maybe stagger some time off for the core staff and get some perspective. Would that be radical?

Love to all,

JQC

[pgodbold]

639. Although I am an old hand in the progressive internet sphere I am new here...

I can only encourage you to keep the doors open... yes we are like herding cats and yes it is hard.

Honest speak though ... I need you guys ... I really do need you guys....and thank you for being here.

Peter G.

[stopbush]

640. As a DU Old Timer who has been very close to cutting the cord this past year,

I appreciate your thoughts.

Last week, I deleted my DU bookmark in my browser, resigned to visit only occasionally, and to become a lurker, rather than a regular poster. I looked at the fund-raising drive and decided to pass this time around, not that I've been a great giver to DU or anything, but I have consistently given a little to keep the place going.

So I'm one of those old farts (I turn 56 next month) who doesn't like the beating up on fellow Dems that has become SOP around here. Those of us who started voting decades ago (my first pres vote was for McGovern) and who went to the polls year after year, faithfully supporting Dems who - in retrospect - were much weaker candidates and politicians than is Obama, spent a long time in the political wilderness as the Rs won election after election and took this country down the spiral from which it may never recover. Now, here we are in a position of power, and it's the Ds who are beating up on Ds, like the members of a junta fighting out who will win the peace after the war has been won.

Well, I'm tired of it. I'm tired of people wanting Dems to fix yesterday what was screwed up yesterday. It doesn't work that way. You don't spend decades screwing things up and fix them overnight. We can all bitch that Obama is moving too slow on this or that, or that he's too much like an R on that or this, but the fact is that he has gotten more major legislative victories through the Congress in two years than most presidents get done in 8 years.

I don't know what the answer is for DU, but as a long time Dem who knows from long experience that we need to hang together or we will surely hang alone, that DU in its present form isn't helping. It may not even be hurting. It may simply be becoming irrelevant.

[pgodbold]

648. What he said.

[DevonRex]

685. What he said.

Except that if I had to choose, I'd have to say that I'd lean toward it just might be hurting. It does bear the name Democratic and it does SAY it's about promoting Democratic candidates for elected office.

Yet if an independent came here for honest information they'd think the Democratic Party was the same as the Republican party or worse. That's not irrelevant considering the number of hits this place gets a day.

[SunsetDreams]

997. nice post, agree.

[Blue_Roses]

1142. I think this speaks for many of us here at DU who have become

frustrated with the toxicity.

"Those of us who started voting decades ago (my first pres vote was for McGovern) and who went to the polls year after year, faithfully supporting Dems who - in retrospect - were much weaker candidates and politicians than is Obama, spent a long time in the political wilderness as the Rs won election after election and took this country down the spiral from which it may never recover. Now, here we are in a position of power, and it's the Ds who are beating up on Ds, like the members of a junta fighting out who will win the peace after the war has been won."

Bingo. Just simple and to the point! Thank-you! :applause:
:) :toast:

[Tarheel_Dem]

1689. [phone]

[northzax]

1740. ding ding ding

i was actually thinking almost this exact same line: "like the members of a junta fighting out who will win the peace after the war has been won." it's easy to be a revolutionary, to be angry. it's hard to govern. three years ago, at the base of it, we all hated Bush. sure, we might disagree about what we should do once he was gone, but we all agreed on that first step. now those details matter, and people are so invested in the angry young man persona, it's tough to let it go. I almost never come here any more, there's no reason to. Frankly, if I were Skinner, et al I would have pulled the plug on January 19, 2009. This place works as an opposition board, not as a majority one.

[southmost]

641. i agree DU has changed

from being a preaching to the choir type of site...
to an active exchange for ideas for what the democratic party should stand for.

This change had prompted me to become more than just a reader, now I have been adding my voice to the mix.

keep it up DU

[barbtries]

644. i've turned to pretty much lurking

i love the president and there's a lot so far in his administration that has disappointed deeply. i want real progressives in office but if i don't work for the democrats the people in office will not be democrats or progressives, they'll be republicans. and not even having DU all on the same page again is worth having republicans back in power.

and thus i lurk. if i do offer an opinion regardless of where i may stand on the issue there will be somebody there ready to jump rudely, it seems. i feel like i got slapped and not for a good reason. i guess what i'm saying is that what i miss about DU is civility. but i just can't quit DU.

how much do you want to bet that you will make your goal? i'll put 50 cents on it.

last but not least, i need my new bumper sticker. :)

ETA missing words. sorry at work should really be lurking not commenting......

[polmaven]

645. Skinner, might I speculate

that, in addition to your thoughts, there may be another reason for fewer donations. I renewed my donation just prior to the fund drive, but it was not a much as I have donated in the past. 2 months before the renewal time, I lost my job, and I am now living on significantly less income, and watching every penny. I'm sure there are others at DU in the same circumstances, and some nearing the 99er status, if not past it. I guess what I'm saying is that some of it may simply be for financial reasons.

[Norrin Radd]

647. The disagreements are interesting to me. They help me make

up my mind about issues (and are amusing, when people act like miffed children). Not donating on my part is purely a perpetual lack of extra money.

[John Q. Citizen]

656. +1

[Wanet]

651. My two cents worth

Dear Skinner -- First of all I want to thank you and the other moderators for your hard work over the years keeping this site running. You seem to be asking for feedback, so here is mine: I've never been able to afford to donate and don't post often, although I have read the site extensively for years. Part of the reason I'm reading less often lately is I'm so depressed about the fact that the current Administration has kept and even increased many bad policies from the Bush years, and hasn't even tried to enact the progressive measures promised during the campaign. It's like that moment in Braveheart where Wallace takes off the helmet of the knight protecting Longshanks, and sees that it's Robert the Bruce. Mainly I don't read the site much anymore because the most vocal posters don't share my progressive orientation, and I don't feel at home. Another drag over the years is the fact that any post that mentions religious faith or spirituality is shouted down by the Sky Daddy crowd. The Religion forum is only a place to deingrate spirituality and people of faith. I am sad to see DU contuining to change into something I don't want to be a part of -- it has been an emotional and intellectual haven for me and for many others. Good luck with whatever you decide to do. -- Wanet

[fascisthunter]

655. While the Rift between members is an obvious reason...

I think one reason which has not been talked about on this thread is the fact that many have lost hope due to the actions and inactions of this admin and the party as a whole. Ignoring this is to the detriment of the site and party itself. Those criticising the admin and party are trying to point out obvious reasons for this party's decline, unfortunately the more conservative/anti-populist segment of this site wants all that criticism to end. Many have been banned because of it... it's a bit ironic in a way, because the very people who are trying to improve the Party are the ones who don't post here anymore. There are still many here fighting the good fight, but it looks as if the party itself and this site have moved to the right.

Also, times are very tough, but then again, that depends on each member's life style or how much they make... most around me, are hurting.

[mntleo2]

664. Skinner, it's mostly the economy, not ...

... differences. My most recent dear friend is a Republican and watches Fox News, she detests Obama and blames him for the economy. I am the exact opposite. As a matter of fact my parents leaned Socialist because they were WOBBLYS.

What has brought us together? The economy. While I am an activist for the poor and been poor all my adult life, she was raised wealthy, is well educated (much more then me with a sterling college education) and did not make under $250,000 a year before she and her husband and their 3 kids lost their jobs, their home, everything.

We joked during our recent primary we were canceling out each other's vote. Neither she and I dreamed we would give one another the time of day under any other situation.

The point I am making is that, as the economy sinks even those who have once been upper class are not able to give anymore. And the middle class and lower classes have nothing left. It makes little difference that I see this economy as a product of Republican decisions that left Obama in a big pile of poo and she believed her beloved Bu$h and his cohorts are doing all they could to prevent it (yeah right). She and I are living the same reality now and the reality is we both are stone-cold broke.

Thus we have found common ground and discuss politics all the time. I have found that I am not as triumphant about "being right" about what was coming. Over 15 years ago s a low income person I knew the policies and laws being put into place for the poor was purposefully making low income families "the canaries in the mine" and that these laws would pertain to the time to upper income people when the economy fell as it has now. There IS a literal meaning to, "Whatever you do to the least of these, you do to yoursef ..." I cannot parade it before my friend because seeing her pride and reality crumble into dust just breaks my heart because I love her. I thought I would feel a lot of schadenfreude (sp?) but instead I am teaching her how to survive in poverty I share with her whatever I have with my arm around her in solidarity for those who face what she does and loses their harsh judgment about what I have lived for decades.

Finding common ground is the key here. My mama taught never to EVER trust a Republican and here I am with someone I know Mom would love if she were alive, in spite of who my friend was and what she used to think. While it is not my mission as far as my friendship with my new best friend to convert her, I feel it will take some time but she will see that what we liberals have been saying all along was right (pun intended). I will be gentle with her and respect her views. I suspect they will change over time ~ indeed they already are because she has little choice as she and her family struggle.

Perhaps reaching out to the disillusioned is a good thing. We just need to be gentle and forget the triumphant attitudes that we were correct all along about the way Republicans eat their own. Just walk with the suffering it has produced and remember the 5 stages of grief, two stages of which is denial and anger. Acceptance comes WAY past those two.

Hope this helps ...

Love,
Cat in Seattle

[Kingofalldems]

672. I like conservative Dems, liberal Dems and moderate Dems--

I do NOT like republicans and there is at least one who posts here often. I generally donate every quarter but I sometimes hesitate for the very fact that this poster is still here. Is that wrong?

[Downwinder]

683. As long as he is helping pay the bills. I have no problem with

Republicans paying for my entertainment.

[Kingofalldems]

728. Poster a non donater

So DU foots the bill

[Renew Deal]

696. You can't worry too much about other people.

There will always be people you don't like in any group, especially one with 150,000 people.

[asjr]

673. Skinner, I do not see that it is your fault that

this blog is not going well. I still come here after 8 years. I have an idea most have me on ignore but that is fine with me. I came to DU quite by accident and fell in love with it. When I came it was about a year after GWB "won" the presidency. At that time we were all brothers and sisters. We were united. People could post just as they desired without any rancor towards each other. Some of the funniest things I have ever read or heard came from DUers. Thee was a feeling of empowerment here and I mean that in a good way. But times change and they sure have changed. We now have a Democratic president who is several persons. He seems to be a very adaptable guy. He has managed to do great things since he was elected. But those have been overlooked as the Republican's cobra head has reared itself. Lies, lies and more lies have been told about our new president. This has become almost actual war between parties and it is bound to have an effect on all of us. If we do not like what Obama is doing it is fine to print it. Just stop the snarkiness. Rudeness has raised its head on DU and it is harmful. DU is a place to let others know how you feel, but at least have the decency to respect another person's ideas. We do not have to agree with them. I do not post as much now, and I stopped coming to DU for a while. But I learn from it. I think I may be one of the oldest on DU and as such have learned from my aging and actually sometimes I make sense. I feel certain there are many trolls that have come to DU. Ignoring them can be a good thing.

Don't ever think of abandoning DU. And never think it is your fault.

[Howler]

675. I love the D.U. now.

I wasn't here when it first began so I don't really understand the difference.
The only reason i haven't donated is my husband and I are on a very strict budget in this economy.
My Husband asked me to get my donations down to once a year and my favorite fund raising drive is the hearts.

So I hope to donate then.

[MilesColtrane]

684. Off topic spam here, but...

THANKS to whoever donated in my name.

:hug:

[freebrew]

688. Lots of posts

Unemployed, under-employed. That's my excuse. I'll try to find some change in the sofa, unless I need it for gas.

Been a member here for quite a while, though I don't post a lot. Seems to me there was always at least 2 sides, not counting the trolls. Some of us are more progressive than others, some have different ideas of what progressive means.

Don't forget there are also vast differences in our ages, proven recently by the anti-boomer threads.(sick individuals, hah!)

We are divided by guns(rkba), the law(authoritarians), religion, etc.

Will Rogers was right about being organized...

[backscatter712]

689. I think something really needs to be done about the negativity.

It's fine to disagree with President Obama - I don't think he's handled Afghanistan well at all, and he's only done about half of what was needed to get the economy rolling again.

But if you're going to accuse him of being a closet conservative, of being just as bad as Bush, if you're going to broad-brush fellow DUers as being "Obamabots", if you're going to be nasty, then you're part of the problem.

I'd say it's time to crack down on the ad-hominem attacks, the broad-brush smears and the general nastiness. Show no mercy with the post deletions and tombstones for people who are being negative, vitriolic, divisive and refuse to be civilized.

[LostinVA]

744. No non troll says Obama is as bad as Bush -- ever

They say some of his policies are, and they -- we -- are right.

[azul]

1428. How about the 3:1 rule?

For every negative criticism (constructive, of course), 3 positive things must be said to balance it. Else people become unbalanced and take it too personally.

People are more emotionally responsive to negativity somehow. Look at the increasing negativity in political ads over the past decades, it must be successful or else why keep pouring the money into it? Why else is DU becoming a disruptive ground?

Have nice days y'all. DU is an excellent place to meek kind people. I love what you do for me, Toyota.

[dalaigh lllama]

690. My two cents

I don't post very often, but I read here just about every day. I'm thinking the lack of donations has more to do with the economy than with folks being disgruntled with the site.

I personally do not like the idea of separate forums for different "sides" here. I don't want an echo chamber -- I enjoy reading the opposing POV on any given topic. Sometimes the poster is eloquent enough to change my mind on a stance I've taken. I think we'd all lose out if we went to our separate "rooms" here. We're all wearing big kid pants now -- if someone can't take someone expressing an opposing POV on an internet site, then perhaps they need to take a break from here for a while.

[Stoic]

699. Thanks for creating and babysitting this community.

I've been around here for a long time and was glad to donate just recently. I'd drop some more if I wasn't unemployed and could sell my house and didn't have a kid in college, etc., not because a split has happened here. The conflicts are actually bringing me back more and more. If I couldn't stand the heat I wouldn't be in the kitchen.

Thanks again.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

704. David, I've never seen anything like the last couple of years in my LIFE.

I'll be honest, I'd like nothing better than to be a donor. And while I'm not prepared to share my current financial situation with DU at large (but a few members of my DU posse DO know the details), let's just say that it comes down to a choice of sending you something I know won't help in the big picture versus spending that same money on food, gas, etc.

Yesterday I went to Jack In The Box. I got a Jumbo Jack with cheese for $2.17. I try not to eat at fast food places too often. I wanted a burger...I'm tired of living on pasta and rice, even though I love both. I wanted a better burger, but I had the money for a $2.17 burger, so that's what I got.

On Monday, I have an appointment with a potential client who could end up paying my bills for the next two months. He has a need, I am confident that I can fill it (so is he, or I wouldn't have gotten the appointment).

He will say yes or no. He will acknowledge the need and have confidence in my ability to meet it or will buckle in fear and clutch his pennies tightly.

David, that's the story of my life, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

I appreciate what you've said here, your openness, your honesty.

I do not believe we are in a "recovery."

I believe Paul Krugman of the New York Times. I posted his article on DU recently, offering his reasons for believing we are in the third depression, not a recession.

A fellow DUer was kind enough to pick up the tab for renewing my donor star a few days ago. When doing so, he asked me to "pay it forward." These days, "paying it forward" is something I do with money, or something I do in other ways.

The wheel will turn. Until then, this is your Website...everyone here knows that. Do what you must. Some will go, some will stay, new people will always be arriving.

"Picking a side"...if I am hearing you correctly...doesn't settle well with you for a number of reasons. Never do anything you are not personally sold on. You've invested too much in this site. Do what you think is right and let the chips fall where they may. People who stick with their convictions generally see the bright rays of the sun each new day.

[backscatter712]

705. Skinner, I'd also recommend sprucing up the admin tools - make it easier to track and ban disrupters

We all know they're here - the Rovian operatives, the ones who'll pretend to be on one side or the other, who play the sockpuppet game - the ones who are here just to stir the shit and keep people fighting.

Get rid of them. By. Any. Means. Necessary.

[amborin]

707. traffic is way down, too; progressives feel driven off by draconian censorship that leaves

good members TSed without warning, while another group of posters gets to break DU rules with impunity;

the boggers not only get to break rules within the bog, with moderators who openly participate and countenance; they're also allowed to make the most vicious and coordinated attacks against progressive posters who dare to speak the truth, and openly boast of using IR toward this end

let's face it: the group that gets to do as they please wants ALL posters to honor and praise any politician with a D next to their name;

but the core, and founding, group of DU posters has always subscribed to the democratic position of:
principle and policy over party or personality

what this means is, the fact that our guy won does not mean we now abandon those principles; it means we speak out, we criticize, we demand a different tack;

do progressives want to become like the bushies we all denounced? remember bushies? if Bush did it, it was ok; the fact Bush did it, or advocated it, or supported it, was the main criterion of value/worth for them; Bush was the arbiter of truth and reality. please, let's not become what we so justifiably derided!

what's happening, however, is progressives who dare to criticize, and who dare to defend themselves against vicious attacks, are leaving DU;
some are TSed; some ask for their accounts to be deleted; many others are simply leaving in great dismay

my recommendation:

enforce the rules fairly for all posters; or create a large sub-forum that is unmoderated;

[ThomCat]

712. Far too many really good people TSed BECAUSE

they stood up for good principles instead of bland civility.

You're right. Too many progressives have been driven away.

[XanaDUer]

868. And that started in 2005

there is a vast virtual grave of TS'd DUers, many of whom are missed. I know my feelings started to change after that.

I've been here almost from the beginning. I remember the extreme ugliness during the 2003-04 nominations.

So, I agree with you. It is one thing to ban someone for harassing and cursing, etc. People on different "sides" of an issue or candidate who would gang up on someone who supported a different candidate to get others banned did happen. As thrilled as I was to find this place, living in a RW area (nowhere near as RW as where I live now, but you gotta go where the jobs are in American nowadays like the Joads), I had to step away for quite awhile just to regain some equilibrium.

Also, the economy is the pits. I am waiting to get laid off every week now, so I'll have to pick up and move yet again when I find a more stable job situation.

XD

[ThomCat]

884. It started long before that. But it started happening wholesale

at some point. That might have been in 2005. :(

[XanaDUer]

1100. Yes. That was the point of no return, for me.

Nt.

[LaurenG]

907. Unfortunately, this is my take as well

Time for amnesty or something.

[ThomCat]

952. Would it do the least bit of good?

The one thing you can always depend upon here at DU is that those in charge will never trust the opinions of the minority communities.

If a straight man can rationalize his homophobia well enough to satisfy the average straight people, so that only the LGBT community recognize posts as homophobic, well, of course the straight guy must be right and the LGBT community are just complainers. Straight people get to define what it homophobia, not the LGBT community. Those LGBT folks are being disruptive and need to be tombstoned for complaining!

If a man can rationalize his sexism well enough to fool guys, so that only women who are feminists recognize his posts as sexist, well, of course the guy must be right and the feminists must be complainers. Guys get to define what is sexist, not women who are feminists. Everyone knows Feminists are just troublemakers! Those feminists are being disruptive and need to be tombstoned for complaining!

And if a white guy can rationalize about race well enough to fool, well, just about everyone, so that only a few people who claim to be people of color complain about his posts being racist, then obviously he's right and those people of color are just being over-sensitive complainers. White guys get to define what is racist, not people of color. People of color who complain too much need to be tombstoned for complaining!

Never, ever trust minority communities to know whether posts really express a bias against them. What the hell could minorities know about discrimination against themselves? They have no special history of seeing, understanding and analyzing the language used against them? Oh know, the authorities run by a committee flawed structure by design to stifle complainers and sustain majority opinions knows best!

It's best to just admit some token members of each minority to the committees, and absorb them into the structure to keep the peace and stifle complainers! That will show those members of any minority community that we know better than them and have their best interests at heart! Really it will!

[dionysus]

733. there isn't any censorship here. jesus christ. talk about hyperbole

[OnyxCollie]

785. You are correct.

There isn't any censorship here, per se.

But allowing a vocal minority to pile on posters with whom they do not agree with snark, name-calling, and other argumentative fallacies is just as effective.

[dionysus]

795. i hardly think it's onesided at all.

[OnyxCollie]

802. Of course you don't.

Neither did Sam Fox.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7vCGm33HAU

[Lorien]

1278. You need to look up the word then. You obviously don't understand it's meaning.

[LostinVA]

749. Nice post

[Ignis]

974. +1 for "principle and policy over party or personality"

:applause:

[fascisthunter]

1065. well said

[Catherina]

1091. +1 "enforce the rules fairly for all posters; or create a large sub-forum that is unmoderated" n/t

[NorthCarolina]

1319. Principle and policy over party or personality

is what "Democratic Underground" should be about. If critical thinking is not allowed, then what is the real purpose of the site? I see it repeatedly stated that any poster critical of administration actions simply "hate Obama". How childish is that? Grownups discuss principle and policy over party. Shall we cheerlead for Arlen Specter simply because he choose to become a Democrat to improve his own lot? I say we should cheer for his actions when they are worthy of it, but not for the simple fact that he has a "D" after his name now. If the goal of the site is to improve the Democratic Party, then a simple cheerleading site isn't going to accomplish that.

[notesdev]

713. Couple of comments

In terms of the groups/factions discussion... that's going to happen anywhere. The reason why the differences are coming more to the fore now is that since the D's are in control of the government, we have everyone having waited a long time to see their priorities addressed. Those who are seeing that are happier than those who aren't.

On the subject of the donations not being what they used to be... that's probably 99% attributable to the economic situation and I wouldn't read any more into it than people being unemployed and having no money.

[Orsino]

714. By now they'll be crowing about this on that other site.

If linking to that doesn't make up the difference, I'll eat my hat.

[Aramchek]

808. here's a little sampling:

this is in response to Skinner's concern about what the slow drive says about DU.

Yeah, sure you did Skinner, you are sooooo concerned about the plight of your members. Fuck you! You're little eugenics program attempting to purify DU has failed and your board is sinking because of it. Good riddance!

The consummate propagandist, talking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time. I for one will be glad to see the bloated rotten corpse of DU in the grave with a fresh mound of dirt on top.

So all you zombies and TSed former DUers crawl out of the dirt and dance upon the grave of Democraticunderground.com

Come witness the ultimate tombstone, that in which Skinner tombstones himself and the rest of his diseased board.

I, for one, think shit like this should make those of us who do come here for the Community stand up together and assure the survival of this place where we have learned and grown and done so much good.
E Pluribus Unum

Long Live the Democratic Underground!

[dionysus]

867. yeah but, they have what... a few dozen bitter souls at most?

[DainBramaged]

1150. (sigh) You seem to be the bitter one. People have the RIGHT to GO anyfuckingwhere they please on the

Internet.


Who are You to hold it against them? Some REALLY GREAT DUers LEFT because of the bullshit (like yours) and went somewhere else, so what.


You are a shining example of what has gone wrong here.

[dionysus]

1217. people are free to do whatever they want of course, but to me, if you use one board specifically

to plot to disrupt another one, and talk shit about its members and how much you'd like to kick their ass, it's pathetic.

:shrug:

[DainBramaged]

1246. I don't see it that way, and that's pretty close to libel to me.

But you can see whatever you want. I don't think I will be seeing YOU anymore.

Goodbye.

[dionysus]

1250. it's true, but hey.. peace and good luck.

[Radical Activist]

715. DU mods must learn to recognize the patterns of cyber-stalker behavior.

This is one reason why I stopped posting here for a long period of time. Lately, I've seen that it hasn't improved.

There's a problem with banning people based only on a single major rule violation. That doesn't deal with the people who are smart enough to not break the major rules. You have to accept that somewhat intelligent belligerents with a stalker mentality will always claim they're being treated unfairly. It's no different than conservatives who cry "liberal media bias" every time they're caught behaving badly.

What's menacing about cyber-stalking isn't the one big attack that provides easy justification for banning. It's death by a thousand cuts. It's a matter of destroying a forum by targeting certain individuals for little forms of personal harassment repeated over and over again. They will always defend themselves by telling people to lighten up and not be thin skinned, because it's only a little joke. It's the "boys will be boys" defense that enables schoolyard bullies.

I'm amazed that people who have their posts removed for instigating personal attacks again and again are allowed to remain here for long periods of time. The managers of this site need to look a little deeper beyond one-time big rule violations, and learn how to recognize long term patterns of behavior that are destructive to any online community. You're doing a poor job of it and that's the source of many problems here. Removing a dozen or so people who show patterns of stalker-mentality behavior in their attacks on others would dramatically change the tone around here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

724. +100

I even tried to deal with one of my personal fans by even reporting every time she engaged in it. The result... well she finally got fed up since I don't take her barbs. She was a fan for over oh five years... that's a long time. But I could count with her following me on EVERY OP and at times commentary like the sun rises in the East. I was told to just put her in ignore, even though there was a clear pattern.

I've seen the behavior before though so I recognized it for what it was. I have a few other fans... they are on the ignore list though.

[Radical Activist]

742. It's easy to dismiss individual acts of behavior

that are not menacing on their own. It causes many people to not take it seriously when it should be. Most people who have never had cyber-stalkers don't get it.

You're right by putting them on ignore. But a person with that mentality won't pick just one target. I guarantee they're doing the same thing to others. That's how it slowly destroys a forum when you tolerate that behavior.

[nadinbrzezinski]

755. Well the problem comes down

to most people on and off the web do not know what stalking is... in a real sense... We all know the definition. And the same goes for bullying behavior. So it is hard for people to get it.

On the bright side I haven't gotten any lovely gifts this time around. (When sending viruses around was not yet a crime we got a lovely one... oh the days!)

Yep, been around the web since the good ol' mean days of Usenet and ALMOST the prodigy boards. Ohh I had a FAST modem, going at 300 BAUD.

Did I just slightly date myself?

:-)

I would suggest some training, but that costs money.

[Radical Activist]

801. Training is a very good idea.

Even finding good materials for mods to read about what cyber-stalking is and how to recognize it could help.

[nadinbrzezinski]

814. And that is easy to find on the web

:-)

Now when Net Neutrality goes away that might not be the case.

[LostinVA]

750. I call it the "OPERATIONMINDCRIME Syndrome"

[Barack2theFuture]

1594. +1000000

[ScreamingMeemie]

723. This is extremely hard for me to write, but I think you are spitting in the wind.

You can't bring back the feeling of community we once felt from the "old" DU. Times change, people change, "friend"ships change. There was a time that I (as MrsGrumpy) logged in here first, every day. Now I can go weeks without once even thinking of DU. I have a fatherless boy to raise. I am a different person now, just as many on here are. You, EarlG and elad are different people now. Where once there was a commitment to this place there really isn't any more. The railing, arguing and constant emails (in my opinion) have caused you to make some decisions that you would have, at one time, never made. I loved moderating this place during the '04 primaries and that was a rough time. I used to stay up till 4 in the morning trying to make this the best meeting place for Democrats on the internet. DU was always an open window on my desktop. Now, I wouldn't moderate if you paid me to. I too, as many have stated, used to donate to DU regularly for myself and others. To be honest I was ticked off the last fund drive when someone donated for me. I was angry...over a few things; the insane banning of several GLBT posters and their allies, the acceptance of a few banned posters back, being placed on forced ignore with a few people that I am good friends with based upon what I am guessing someone "told you". You say there are posters here that you used to like and who used to like you, I am guessing I am one of them based upon the fact that some of your admin decisions when it comes to dealing with me (a poor, broken woman in the minds of some here) have been driven by what someone told you, with no contact with me at all. I wish I could feel sorry about it, but I don't have the energy anymore.

It's funny you say "picking sides"...people will do that no matter what you provide for them. I've been through it myself with several "friends" here on DU based upon my inability and refusal to "pick sides" based on internet friendships, not real life relationships.

I am late to the party, and you will never get to this one, but that is how I see it. The place got out of control, with less admin involvement and more moderator bias. You can never go back. I was once your biggest fan. I'm sorry I can't say that anymore. But I'm pretty sure you feel the same about me. It was nice while it was.

[Duncan Grant]

1445. Wanted you to know someone read this and remembered.

We are all different people now -- so very true.

Best wishes, 94114_S_F

[ScreamingMeemie]

1637. Hey...it's good to see a friendly name.

I miss chatting with you.

Take care

[LWolf]

1752. I remember you.

And then.

:hi:

[EmeraldCityGrl]

731. I'm relatively new around here

and don't know the true history of DU that is referenced frequently. I do feel an uncomfortableness that
I can't put my finger on and that feeling has increased considerably in the last few months. There are so
many things I like about DU and want to feel the freedom to post my opinions honestly. I don't feel I fit
in with the principles of any particular side, but I'm here to learn and benefit from the best points offered
by opposing views.

I hope DU remains as diverse as possible. Unless there was some kind of unspoken pledge to be a place
geared toward a particular breed of Democrat, I don't see how diversity can ever be anything but a good thing.

Once again DU can be a confusing place for people that don't know the history. But, I feel very motivated to
donate after reading your post. The work you all do is very much appreciated.

[Enthusiast]

732. Some of us sit home

all day because our health is compromised. We can no longer spend money on the things we loved. Yet we are still strapped for cash, for disposable income.

[Political Tiger]

735. Decision time: Do you want this to be DEMOCRATIC Underground or Free Republic Lite?

This used to be a site where Democrats could come to get away from all the Democrat bashing, but not anymore. Now it almost exclusively Democrat bashing. As a Democrat, why would I give money to a site that allows unlimited Democrat bashing?

Here's a good example. A poster posted an editorial from the right-wing rag Washington Times called "EDITORIAL: Democrats: Voters are dumb."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=552762&mesg_id=552762

This right-wing propaganda starts off saying "Missouri's overwhelming rejection of Obamacare made it clear Americans will resist the federal government's power grab..."

Now, I and many others alerted this right-wing garbage yet no action was taken. The post is still up, and was never locked, and the same poster continues to post right-wing talking points on DU.

What the hell is up with that? Why would I give money to a web site that allows right-wing trash to be posted on it? If I wanted to read such propaganda, I would go to Free Republic, or some other right-wing site.

Polls show that about 85% of Democrats/liberals support this president. But if one were look at this site, they would think the opposite is true!

You've got disputors on this board who have even formed their own board (Old Elm Tree) where they bash you, DU and anyone who dares to say a kind word about Obama, and I know you are aware of this, and you and I also know they use that forum to coordinate their attacks on pro-Obama, pro-Democrat posts and posters! Despite this, they are allowed free reign on DU.

So Skinner, it's up to you. Do you want this to be a pro-Democratic forum or an anti-Democratic forum? Right now it's an anti-Democratic forum despite the pledge "Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

Take a stand! Tell the haters to go elsewhere. You know who they are. Just look at the board. The same people post the same anti-Democrat, anti-Obama nonsense day after day. They've been complaining about Obama even before he was sworn in. Nothing is ever going to make them happy. Until YOU do something, they will continue to disrupt this board and attack posters because that's what they do!

[DevonRex]

762. Hear hear!!!! + 1000.

Thank you.

[Whisp]

775. wow. That nails it all. This is not Repuglican Underground.

There are people here that agree with Glenn Beck ffs!!

[Kolesar]

788. What misplaced energy

I just had a look at their "recent posts" and I *know* what you mean.
A look at the list of "who is online" told me a lot, too.

Bunch of lazy mouths who I reckon never knocked on a door for a cause.

[Political Tiger]

826. This is a good example of what's wrong with DU.

There are simply too many people, like this poster, who do nothing but troll the board attacking people.

[YOY]

872. DESTROY THEM ALL WITH FIRE!!! BURN!!!

n/t

[azmouse]

822. You are awesome!!

:yourock:

[Mithreal]

829. self-delete

[lamp_shade]

831. Amen to that.

[EFerrari]

878. A disrupter is not "someone who disagrees with you". n/t

[jgraz]

891. Unfortunately, that's not entirely true under the new rules

For example, if someone puts up a post saying "Barack Obama is a good man, and has the best interests of the American people at heart", disagreeing with that is a violation of the current DU rules.

This is what happens when you censor a board not just for civility, but for content. You get people labeled as "disruptors" who are really just voicing a legitimate opinion.

[EFerrari]

923. This focus on Barack Obama is a set up for crashing and burning, imo.

I get that a lot of people care a great deal about him and everything connected to him. But that's just a part of the project. Those people should have a place where they can do that and they should also be enjoined from forcing their own enthusiasm on people who don't find Obama all that interesting.

[jgraz]

937. Most of DU's major conflicts are caused by personality-focused posters

Not just of Obama, but Kerry, Hillary, Dean, etc, etc, etc. Whenever people start worshipping a person rather than following a set of principles, the stage is set for a major flameout.

[EFerrari]

945. I hadn't thought about it that way but it's probably true.

On the other hand, people get very focused on an issue like gun control or an event like 9/11 with the same kind of reactivity if not the same volume.

I'd really hate for DU to wind up organized around how posters feel about Obama, though. Because it shrinks all the other many interests that people bring here.

[readmoreoften]

1201. Excellent point. Identifying with a politician over principle or stance is terrifying.

People are just people. It's a continuation of celebrity mentality.

[WI_DEM]

905. Well said.

[Catherina]

1109. Partisan nonsense. Skinner would gain more paying attention to the disatisfaction

of former contributors who left this site than in listening to sycophants who are trying to pretend there's no problem HERE.

There's a big problem right here in River City and your constant attack posts have greatly contributed to it. Those people on Old Elm Tree were highly respected members of this community who contributed real SUBSTANCE to DU.

Those are the people I would donate to read. Until that kind of quality comes back to DU, donations will keep slumping and people will keep leaving.

White House press releases and snarky posts about ponies don't cut it for people who really want to discuss issues.

It's ironic that as support for DU is going DOWN, support for a splinter site is going up. The numbers don't lie.

What you want Skinner to do will only make this site worse. He already accommodated suggestions from the BOG too much and now the results are here.

Hammer truth time.

http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?&w=400&h=220&o=f&c=1&y=t&b=ffffff&n=666666&r=6m&u=democraticunderground.com&&u=dailykos.com&u=mydd.com&u=crooksandliars.com&u=americablog.com&

[LostinVA]

1284. Wow -- I love you

Platonically, of course. :pals:

[NorthCarolina]

1330. THANK YOU for the

mention of Old Elm Tree. Signing up now. Hope they accept me.

[MissDeeds]

1658. Excellent post

Thank you for saying what needed to be said. Some of the people who made DU a great board are now holding court at the Old Elm Tree. Many left on their own, some got TSd, but they are still fighting the good fight for real Democratic values and policies.



:hi:

[Dappleganger]

1698. +10000

[readmoreoften]

1202. I agree: right-wing Obama supporters who apologize for anti-union policy, DOMA,

and the privatization of the public school system are definitely turning this place into Free Republic Lite. Especially with their anti-immigrant leanings.

[Number23]

1325. I know I say this all of the time, but it's true

You RULE.

[LWolf]

1753. The funny thing about that

is that DU reminds me of "free republic lite" when it is spammed by militant ditto-heads for Obama instead of Rush.

[BootinUp]

748. Skinner, your thread has turned into one big whinefest!

I'm mildly amused by it. Suggestion, don't take all this stuff too seriously. Proceed with the survey, reconsider the unrec feature as another poster suggested. Occasionally you might need to slap some heads and remind folks to keep it somewhat civil.

[ScreamingMeemie]

751. Think of it as a whine for a whine.

You get what you give here on DU. :hi:

[WI_DEM]

913. Skinner--regarding unrec button

remember why it was put here in the first place. Too many anti-dem and anti-Obama posts were being spammed to the greatest page. Now you got rid of the feature which shows how many unrecs a thread got, but I wouldn't get rid of the unrec button.

[defendandprotect]

946. Oh . . really . . . ? Is that why the UN-REC was put in place ... ????

Because of claims of "bashing" of Obama -- ??? !!!

Proving once again how censorship of free speech works AGAINST democratic interests!!

[LostinVA]

964. Yes, that's what I was told

[defendandprotect]

1200. Please see my comments on the results here . . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8981504&mesg_id=8984756


I'm amazed that anyone would admit that --

It isn't like we're talking about someone walking in and slamming Obama --

we're talking about articles comment on policy and issues of this adminsitration --

here's one I'm just about to post --

Nearly 50 percent leave Obama mortgage-aid program

Friday's report from the Treasury Department suggests the $75 billion government effort is failing to slow the tide of foreclosures in the United States, economists say.

More than 2.3 million homes have fallen into foreclosure since the recession began in December 2007, according to foreclosure listing service RealtyTrac Inc. Economists expect the number of foreclosures to grow well into next year.

"The government program as currently structured is petering out. It is taking in fewer homeowners, more are dropping out and fewer people are ending up in permanent modifications," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100820/ap_on_re_us/us_mortgage_aid


You'd have to be pretty much of a devoted "know-nothing" to try to limit the information

available on a website -- simply because it may point to a failed program!

Amazing!!

[EFerrari]

931. Civil like not invalidating the concerns of others?

[BootinUp]

971. I notice you dropped an adjective I had there

was that in order to justify further whining?

[unpossibles]

753. I actually still largely love DU but am a bit broke too sadly. nt

[FiveGoodMen]

758. 'UnRec' is a morale breaker with no clear purpose.

Getting rid of that would be a small but good start.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

779. Actually, it is a big help (but for an unstated purpose)

There is a group here who view their role in the community as driving people out of the community.

They organize and attack people.

The unrec feature provides a meaningless outlet for their malice.

It is less damaging than any other organized method of attacking people.

[Greyhound]

873. But, it doesn't exclude or prevent the the other methods either.

I think the unrec was the 'go ahead' for the rampant disruption that has yielded this mess.

[Liberal_in_LA]

851. agreed

[Aleric]

773. quod erat demonstrandum

I took my earlier response to this and created a separate post as an experimental mini-poll. I wanted to get a kick/rec score on it to measure reaction. Out of over 1100 views the score? ZERO. OK, message received. The responses? Clearly negative. Again, message received. Moderator response? To lock the post. That last was really unnecessary and underscores the point better than anything I could say.

[Desertrose]

776. Exactly...just exactly how does one respond to a LOCKED post?

You were right on with that post, Aleric. It does send the message loud & clear.

[EFerrari]

935. It underscores the point that reading this forum's rules is a good idea. n/t

[flvegan]

783. Making it about sides is going to be a problem, unless...

DU picks a side and rids itself of the other, or DU allows itself to actually become a community again by relaxing the rules a great deal. When I say "picks a side" I mean in a much greater realm than the "loves Obama unconditionally" and "Obama isn't meeting what I voted for" sides. I mean a side on everything. I can tell you now, though. That ain't gonna work.

"Community" is a funny word. I belong to one. In my neighborhood, my intimate community, I know my neighbors by name. I know some things about some, little about others, more than I really should about others. I've got the middle aged mixed race gay male couple a couple houses down. The drug dealer across the street. The nice old man on the corner. There's the drunk, the used car salesman, the trophy wife and her husband who I swear runs a strip club (stereotyping, I know). I know who the Dems are from their lawn signs during every election period. I also know who votes Republican. Some of them, I have no idea what their political compass is. I can have a polite conversation with any one of them about select topics, differing with each person. That's how a community should be. Not an echo chamber, stuck in groupthink gear.

DU has become far too much like the floor of the Senate. Speak your side, but not harshly and not out of turn. There's been way too much "come to order!" lately. A community is more like the bar down the street from the Senate. Everybody gets together. You sit with who you want to and are free to discuss/debate issues with anyone in the room. The place largely self-polices. It's fair, and you make of it what you want.

I think DU would be brilliant if GD was like the Sports Forum. Just have at it. Keep LBN as moderated. Lots of non-DUers read it as the invaluable resource that it is. Hell, I read The Telegraph and The Sunday Times and I live thousands of miles away. I'm not suggesting DU become Sparta, but there are forums (and I'm not going to name names) that have been left decimated, an absolute wasteland because of how they've been moderated. And yeah, I say that with a bit of bias as a lot of good posters (whom I happened to like, yes) have been banned, causing said decimation.

I'm not here to criticize, just offering a possible solution to what appears to be a pretty big problem.

[EFerrari]

823. Except, check this out, fly,

People who are interested and active in politics usually have one of two MOs . They follow people on principle or they follow issues on principle, mainly. Iow, while I might like this or that politician, my orientation is always going to be issues because that's how my brain works. Someone else might follow several issues but they will always be more comfortable using politicians or other public figures as a lens. It's just two different ways to do things.

Why not just acknowledge that and give these two groups their own space? We're already mostly doing that in the G forums. Why not just formalize it?

That might turn down The Big Nasty. I didn't go into GDP for MONTHS during the primaries because it was just too ugly and painful. If you'd told me it wasn't going to end but it was going to spread to all the big forums, I wouldn't have believed you.

With respect to self-policing, the thing is that by now, there are people here who have never known DU any other way as well as people who have become habituated to the Big Nasty as a survival measure. We can have a community or we can have TBN. We can't have both and that's why I don't see how self-policing could work.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

836. Great critique. You are on to something.n/t

[Ignis]

1159. I could get behind this approach, too.

I post on moderated forums that enforce strict compliance with a published set of rules.
I post on unmoderated forums that use a free-for-all, settle-it-yourselves approach.

Either approach works. What does not work is inconsistency.

[DeepModem Mom]

806. After years of prolific posting, I more or less became a lurker...

the day after President Obama's Inauguration. My main reason was personal -- I needed time for some other things that I was pursuing and still am doing that. It was a sort of retirement from one activity to leave more time for others.

Also, I had no interest in "beating up" on Barack Obama. (I proposed and organized the DU Barack Obama Group.) The memory of the previous 8 years, on Inauguration Day, was too fresh in my mind. It is, in fact, still very fresh in my mind. I admit I became angry at much of what I saw on the board and didn't donate to the last fund drive -- the only fund drive I've missed since signing up at DU. I've donated to this one.

I've realized that if I ignore the things here that make me angry, I still get from DU an enormous amount of source material that I find fascinating and valuable. I am deeply grateful to all those here at DU who contribute to that treasure trove of information, insight, and, sometimes, wisdom.

I don't know what the solution to the troubles here are. I think you've made perceptive points in your post. With respect to the fund drive, I wouldn't underestimate the effect of the economy. DU is not without value. And I hope you won't give up on it -- if only for what it was when I, and others, badly needed it, and might one day be again.

[NJmaverick]

821. Skinner if you were lucky enough to meet the President

would you proudly tell him you run the Democratic Underground and offer to show him your website?

[Political Tiger]

830. Good question! n/t

[Desertrose]

841. What does this have to do with the problems here?

Sounds like you are hoping for the continuing of the echo chamber.....

[lamp_shade]

842. ... (tacking this to see if you get a response).

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

854. Because that's what it's all about... a fan site for royalty

Skinner is supposed to run his own site, his own baby in such a way that it would please the king?

That should be a priority?

Would you be proud to show the most powerful person in the world your website...

Incredible.

Obama is President of the United States elected by the People to do their work, not Eva Peron.

[NJmaverick]

930. I would think Skinner would have proudly shown George Bush his site

so your fan site comment is off base and incorrect. At least I know I would have been proud to show DU when he was in the White House.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

981. You speaking for Skinner now? LOL!

[YOY]

995. That's our Mav!!! :Happy sitcom ending:

n/t

[readmoreoften]

1207. Wow, that's creepy, authoritarian, and totally obsequious. And more than a little weird.

Open opportunism. Amazing. I also detect a veiled threat in there...

[BootinUp]

1273. over the top much?

lol.

Geebus f'in crise. lollololol

The poster is simply suggesting that elected democrats looking at this website would be just a wee bit turned off by the heated rhetoric calling for their ouster or some other urgent action against them in a significant percentage of the threads.

[NJmaverick]

1559. You got that right

[LostinVA]

1287. Par for the course, lo these many years.

[NJmaverick]

1558. Wow

simple wow

[Renew Deal]

834. I just checked and traffic is not down relative to other democratic sites

http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?&w=400&h=220&o=f&c=1&y=t&b=ffffff&n=666666&r=6m&u=democraticunderground.com&&u=dailykos.com&u=mydd.com&u=crooksandliars.com&u=americablog.com&

[Kolesar]

856. The vertical scale on that chart

...looks "backwards"

1,000
10,000 -
100,000 -

[Renew Deal]

924. It's traffic rank, so the lower the number the better.

[YvonneCa]

837. This is what I love about DU...

...the honesty. Thank you for this post...and for creating such a great forum for discussion. Despite any flaws, I continue to find DU a place where...through my reading and discussion about issues...I learn more about those issues. I don't say that lightly. As a teacher, learning is something I value highly.

I don't have any solutions to this dilemma. I have often though that...since 2008...the configuration of GD and GDP were out-of-sync. I think I even once suggested a civility forum. :7 (Which, BTW, I still think has merit.)

My only suggestion would be that maybe you could initiate an experimental period...say six months...and try several things:

...take sides, both sides, and see what happens. We'd still not know your actual position on things.

...establish forums for segments of the Democratic Party (Radical to DLC).

...Civility vs. Incivility. :7

I'm sure your ideas are way better than mine. As to the donation issue, my income is now half what it was when I joined. I'd guess many DUers are in the same boat or worse. I can't donate anywhere like I did when income was no problem. My donation level say ZERO about how I value DU. I read and post and learn here. So I'll try to donate after payday...the 1st. ;)

[FloriTexan]

844. Sorry, but its the economy for me.

You'll have to enjoy my measly monthly donation until I can't spare it.

[Diane R]

846. Many journals that post daily are anti-Obama, but often have a prominent spot on the front page.

Perhaps moving the journals to a less prominent position. I get tired of logging on to my DU page, and being blasted by yet another anti-Obama screed in the upper right hand corner.

[EFerrari]

901. That people have divided DU into pro or anti - Obama

posters shows that people are reacting much more than responding.

[saracat]

929. Perfect example. Those who criticize Obama are said to be anti-Obama.

It is NOT anti Obama to criticize the President or the Admin. This isn't personal. The president doesn't need a fan club. He actually needs politcal cover. But I think a lot of people donm't even know what that is. If there is NO public demand for better, we will never be given better.And that demand is not "Aniti-Obama".

[NorthCarolina]

1332. Well said. Hard to belive that this simple truth escapes so many. eom

[Rex]

847. Just mho, you should get rid of the rec/unrec gizmo.

I think a lot of people turned away when the rec/unrec wars started. That is what I noticed, don't know what impact it had on DU. Also, you may want to think of this as a reflection of how bad the economy really is. I mean, I just finally found work again and can start working out my pile of bills that I have to pay.

Things will pick up again, DU is the best Progressive Forum on the Internets!

[YOY]

853. Money is tight.

n/t

[Kolesar]

859. I donate annually at the Valentine-Hearts drive

...and I thought I was "doing my part" to support this site.

[cbdo2007]

896. Main problem at DU isn't disagreements - it is too convoluted with the same posts over and over.

Disagreements are good within our own party because no one is right about every issue all of the time.

The problem on DU is that people post the same damn topic posts over and over and over again so instead of ONE post about Dr. Laura using the N word we get 20 individual posts about Dr. Laura using the N word, which scrolls everything off the main 1 or 2 GD pages off into obscurity. First, people don't know how to search the page or something, like on the Breaking News forum now, there are two posts about Robin Carnahan wanting to extend the Bush tax cuts...so obviously someone didn't do a "page search" for "carnahan" and it's just ridiculous.

[seabeyond]

1012. moderators use to be really good locking repeating threads. i think that made du'ers better at not

reposting. both the community and moderators are not doing so great at that one.

[cbdo2007]

1056. Here's what they should do....

Been thinking about this....

when someone clicks to "Post" it takes them to a screen with a search box where they are instructed to enter a few key words from their title. Then, that search will ONLY search topic headlines from the most recent 2 pages or something, so it will then pull up a list of headlines that match their key words.

Below the search results have a box that says "If your post will not fit into one of these previous posts, click HERE to post a new topic"

Just adds an extra step which forces them to at least do a search of the past few hours of topics before they get a chance to post. One problem with the current search is enter "dr laura" into the search field provided and it pulls up items from 2006 and 2008 mixed in with more recent results, so it doesn't really do posters any good.

[Rosie1223]

900. If you read the entire thread to this point,

Skinner, please respond here so I know you actually listen to your users.

[Jax]

908. Love to see that but doubt you will.

[truebrit71]

904. Nah mate..got bugger all to do with the "rifts" and more to do with the lack of spondoolies...

..If I had the readies I would chip in as I have in the past..right now it's really not do-able..

[Deep13]

915. There are also more places on the internet for lefties to go...

...including Facebook. Almost the same number of internet uses, but with a lot more vendors means there are fewer here.

[BlueIris]

920. Only 600?

That actually surprises me. Sort of.

[emsimon33]

933. Donation is in the mail

[TK421]

941. The title of your OP reminds me of a time when my Dad caught me with pot

and told me that we should talk....

I've been unemployed since last year and am barely scraping by on unemployment ( which won't last forever ) I would donate if I could

The shitty economy may not be the whole reason donations are sluggish, but I guarantee you it is a major part of it

[butterfly77]

948. Thanks Skinner ..

I think you may need to do this more often every few months or so. I think the survey is a great idea..

[InvisibleTouch]

951. Honestly, I've seen fighting and nastiness as long as I've been here...

...which has been since late 2003 or so, gearing up for the 2004 primaries. I don't think it's really any more contentious now than it's ever been. The only difference is that we have Democrats in power now, and I see a lot of people busy trying to tear down what's been accomplished. If they didn't get everything they wanted, if Obama's priorities aren't exactly the same as theirs (and they're not exactly the same as mine, on several topics), then they want to throw it all away.

There must be a way to balance advocacy for the causes that are most dear to us, with support for the President we elected. Because gods know he's got plenty of enemies who are *our* enemies as well, in almost every aspect of ideology. And it's sad that so many of those who were so excited about electing him a couple of years ago, won't support him now.

I seem to recall a rule somewhere in the guidelines that prohibits bashing of Democrats. Maybe that should be the site's gold standard. There's a difference between saying "I don't like what Obama is trying to do on this particular topic" and saying "He's no different than Bush."


BTW, I didn't donate simply because I can't afford it. It's not a comment on this site, which is still invaluable to me.

[EFerrari]

962. Most posters to this board are Democrats and they get bashed daily. n/t

[LostinVA]

978. o one says Obama is the same as Bush

GOD.

[SeattleGirl]

1014. Yes, they do. I've seen those posts and have alerted on them.

Either you are doing selected reading of the board (as most people do), or you are flat out not telling the truth.

People HAVE posted that crap.

[seabeyond]

1041. people were horrible to kerry, lol. nt

[Yuugal]

954. Why I can't give anymore

1) The mods:
I've had so many posts deleted for not swearing fealty to "The One" that I don't bother writing here anymore. Why would I want to contribute to a place that doesn't want me around? It is obvious to anyone with any working grey matter that if you are one of the bulletproof people here you can be as nasty as you want all day every day and so can your socks and you will be encouraged by the mod team. However if your devotion to Dear Leader doesn't radiate from everything you post you are in trouble. That has a way of silencing people and a way of making them not donate.

2) The admins:
They got rid of so many great progressive posters, people like Lerkfish and Debbierlus and Daveparts, I could go on and on and on and on with the names of the fallen. Did these people threaten women with violence? Nope, but that is just fine if you are on a certain side, those people were just guilty of liberalism and we all know DU won't stand for that. The "old times" you are pining for were when DU was a progressive site though. So when I read whining on this thread about the old elm tree some of us have taken refuge under, I laugh and think: That place would be very much smaller if you didn't keep it chock full of the best progressive voices that USED to be on DU!

3) The Boggers:
The boggers are bulletproof and since the one who stalks me and gets the few things I do post deleted has 100 times as many posts as me in the same 6 years shouldn't that person give 100 times the money? Some of them are on this thread pissing in the face of the people you are trying to reach Skinner. The boggers are so loyal I'm sure they gave a grand each right? They could have stayed away and let us discuss why we are upset but they are right here on your thread doing what they always do: piling on, personal insults, accusing everyone else of wanting Palin.

The sides aren't 50/50, just check the greatest page. Drain the damn bog and donations will rise. Otherwise why shouldn't those of us who aren't as equal as the favored people hold the financial burden? Let the bulletproof pay the tab, they are the ones benefiting right now.

It also would help if you would come right out and say that DU doesn't take money from any political groups. Since the modding leans so much toward the DLC/DNC aims and goals(silencing and belittling the left), many of us feel DU is already getting paid well and doesn't need our money as much. A firm statement would help.

[dionysus]

963. if that "swearing fealty to "The One" " bullshit hurts you so much, stay at the tree then.

[superduperfarleft]

990. Speaking of bullet-proof.... n/t

[DevonRex]

1017. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We knew who you all were talking about way up thread.

Or perhaps I should just go ahead and copy the OET threads over here. Would that make it easier for everybody?

[superduperfarleft]

1075. I have all of 50 posts at OET, many of them defending the moderators here.

Several others using the unmoderated portion to talk shit about some of the posters who were TSed here for being lunatics. So go ahead. Post them. Knock yourself out.

As far as my "bullet-proof" comment, don't flatter yourself. You're not nearly remarkable enough of a poster to be who I was talking about.

[DevonRex]

1136. Now I have surely been cut to the quick. Medic!!!!

:silly:

[dionysus]

1254. shall i fluff a pillow for the fainting couch and fetch the smelling salts?

:P

[DevonRex]

1265. Yes please. *sniff*

And could Wadsworth bring me a throw and a little sherry?

[dionysus]

1336. i'll have him bring a luncheon plate and some gray poupon as well.

;)

[DevonRex]

984. If you hate the Mods, hate the Admin, hate the boggers, yet the tree spams all day every day

where's your beef? As you say, check the greatest page. The tree posts constantly, recs to high heaven, coordinated in the Pizza Party which is out of view of the public. Seems to me you control a whole hell of a lot around here even though you hate pretty much everything about DU and plainly state it over there.

You all are even dancing happy dances about DU's demise, trying to get DUers banned, naming names of posters and Mods, calling Skinner names right and left. And you have the NERVE to come over here and whine? That takes balls the size of fucking Texas.

[dionysus]

1008. when i was a younger man, Wadsworth warned me about these types, with their

greased back hair, tight jeans and rock and roll music, always ready to pick a fight. smoking cigarettes in the movie theater.

sad.

it is rather pathetic they have to have a whole site dedicated to trashing DU.

:rofl:

[DevonRex]

1038. It is rather sad.

I'm beginning to think some hippie lessons are in order, though. I'm not exactly getting a flower child vibe over there, are you?

[dionysus]

1045. maybe i should send them copies of my Grateful Dead records...

[superduperfarleft]

1080. If it's so pathetic, why do you go out of your ways to skirt DU rules and make

passive aggressive references to them? There's a whole unmoderated forum there: head on over and call people whatever names you like. That's what I did.

Again, the admins have spoken very clearly on this issue. Certain sites are not to be referred to, for a number of reasons. Why are you and others so insistent on constantly breaking this rule (at least in spirit)?

[FrenchieCat]

1103. There's a reason the other site isn't supposed to be mentioned here.....

and in fact, the entire thing doesn't make much sense ......
that members there can talk about many of us and call us names,
but we aren't supposed to even mention that this site exits
and that folks who participate at that hate site (cause let's face it, that's all it is)
on the one hand, are some of the same folks who continue to whine here about how they
should be able to do here what they do there.

In otherwords, those folks want it all,
including getting rid of those they personally dislike.

Why should they demand that Skinner allow them to do that at DU?
What makes them so much more special
than everyone else? :shrug:

[superduperfarleft]

1129. A whole lot of words that didn't address anything that I said. n/t

[NorthCarolina]

1335. Let me just say, you have the perfect icon. eom

[Ignis]

1176. "Why are you and others so insistent on constantly breaking this rule?"

Because they can.
And they're bulletproof.
And they know it.

It's the same reason the local Sheriff's son knows he can speed without fear of a ticket. Maybe he was worried about being caught the first few times, but by time #300? I doubt he's worried about it anymore.

[superduperfarleft]

1311. Yep. You'd think we'd have learned after OMC was allowed to vomit all over the board for years.

Well, to clarify, WE did learn, it's certain others that didn't.

[Sheepshank]

1206. your been asked to swear fealty to "the One" ?

OMG...nobody has the right to require you turn a man into a god or any other diety. How dare they! And then because you didn't your post was deleted? I wish you post hadn't been deleted because I'd liked to have seen that.

That One or The One. those terms are really.......................lost for words. Imagine that.

[Catherina]

1431. Excellent points. You spoke for me too. And I'm really upset to learn Daveparts is gone. +10000 n/t

[prolesunited]

958. Well, I've been here from nearly the beginning

I used to spend entirely too much time here. I learned a lot and met many cool people.

I remember being bounced for saying something critical about (Bill) Clinton. Times sure have changed. The things I frequently see posted about Obama/Democrats are on par with FR.

On the upside, I spend less time here and more time on constructive activities.

I think Skinner is spot on in his analysis. The site was founded primarily in opposition to something, so the personalities that flocked here are more anti-establishment/authoritarian. When the Democrats become the authority, that's what people are going to attack.

In any case, there still is a caring community here, evident any time tragedy or death strikes a DUer or their family or someone needs help with raising funds to perhaps see a loved one before he is shipped off to war or to fix a broken smile. That's what keeps me coming back.

[FrenchieCat]

965. I think there are a variety of views here at DU.....

However, I believe that some folks' disagreements have become personal beyond what should be acceptable.

When my name is actively used via DU PMs to recruit posters to another site whose main pastime is to criticize DU posters and the DU administration (you Skinner) along with the Democratic President and his administration, then I have to start believing that those same folks don't have good intentions towards this community, and that cannot be good for you, for DU in general, and for the Democratic party at large. I have also concluded that same folks don't really care so much about issues as they claim....but rather are engaging in personal Vendettas of elementary porportion. Not only am I and others used as recruitment bait, but there are more threads started at other sites about some of us who post here personally than about any "issues".......

I came to DU looking for some hope and likeminds at a dark time, and I have steadily engaged in believing that politics as the art of the positively possible; not the art of personally destroying other posters....and yet I and some others have been called every name in the book; racists, cheerleaders, sycophants, fans, woodchucks, DLC, Homophobes, etc, etc, etc.....and for me, it is that negative outright contempt that I consider to be over the top, very destructive, meaningless and I believe that at this point, has little to do with politics as a whole, and more with game playing and identity politics....something which will get us progressives nowhere.

So I'm just going to work my state politics more, try to stay off of DU (they won!), and continue being hopeful and working towards getting accomplished those things that are possible in this hateful skeptical and negative political climate. That's why I got into politics, and so, I'm not about to get distracted by folks who believe that because I don't want to pile onto this administration it makes me an unfair biased and bad person. I don't believe that....and I never will.

And whomever gave the me the donor Star; thank you (I'm sure they'll be a thread over there even about this, or a poll or something....but Skinner knows who gave it to me....even though I never will). I'll try to make you proud of what it is that my real aim is.....and it ain't to get caught up in the foolishness that accomplishes nothing positive, and only generates negative energy that increases the likelyhood that folks will feel defeated even before they go to the polls. That's not energy I think will feed the children, or house the homeless, or even convince DLC Democrats or Republicans to vote for good progressive legislation....and that's what I'm in it for; progressive legislation that make the difference in many lives, even if it ain't always mine.

[dionysus]

996. at least you have whole threads dedicated to you... i only get called names in passing....

can you teach me how to be a bigger villian to them?

:D

[FrenchieCat]

998. I'm not sure what it takes........

Whatever it is, it appears that "I've got it".....

[dionysus]

1003. oh yes, you got it!

:hi:

[BootinUp]

1007. Good post Frenchie. nt

[Bobbie Jo]

1037. Excellent post, Frenchie.

...and yet the same posters are in this very thread lamenting the "lack of respect" around here.

Blows my mind.

[saracat]

1046. I am a proud member of other sites and do not know of any that have used

Frenchie or anyone else as "bait". People join websites for many reasons but it is delusional to think entire websites are formed around one individual , or even several. There are many diverse POV on DU , but some are not tolerant of any but their own. That is one reason I do not participate as much on this board. And those that have repeatedly told me I am not welcome and my vote is not needed are the reason why.

I am disgusted by the vulgarity ,and outright ignorance teamed with arrogance I have seen expressed by some. If one can't express an opinion without reducing himselfto vulgarity and constant use of obsenity that it is likely that opinion has little merit. Many do not even know the rules of the Democratic party and throw their ignorance around like a badge. It really doesn't do to defend the Admin with ignorance.

I too am devoting my time to get my favorite local democrats elected, but then, I always have. Unlike some, this isn't "new" to me.

[FrenchieCat]

1084. That's good that you moderate the other site.

I've provided the DU moderators with what I think they need to make their own determination as to whose names are being used to recruit via PMs, and what that site is truly focused on....or one can simply compare via topics and post counts of "Issues" vs. the count of posts "ridiculing DUers" to know what's most important to that site. :rofl:

As for what vulgarity is, that's obviously relative. I don't count words so much as vulgar, as their intent. A word doesn't have to be a curse word to still connotate a vulgar attitude towards others.

As for activism being new or not new, I'll admit that I started 10 years ago, and really not much before. I don't find that as something worthy of snark or something that should be poo-pooed. And in a way, that's what I mean by vulgar being relative, as well as who actually holds this "Truth" many seem to believe they have the corner market on.

[saracat]

1231. The site moderators are not entitled to read PM's.That is a violation of privacy and the fact

that you would encourage them to do such a thing says volumes about you. DU is a better place than that. Whatever problems DU may have, they have never intruded on privacy or broken their code. I am finding really hard to believe that anyone who is a Democrat would even suggest such a thing.That is despicable and worthy of Bush era tactics. I suppose you support FISA too?
And another thing. Sometimes vulgar is just vulgar, and it nearly always indicates a lack of imagination when used frequently.

[FrenchieCat]

1292. Nobody is even talking about what you are implying......

if a few received these "invitations" and chose to relay them to me, there's no FISA in that. If same folks decide to share these "invitations" with the admin, that's their right to do so.

Whatever you are talking about, since it doesn't make sense to me, I'll refrain in responding in kind.

[saracat]

1296. Baloney.And I do find it hilarious that of all people you would be the one

talking about making sense!

[Bobbie Jo]

1614. What's even more hilarious

...is the way you're dodging the point. Frenchie makes perfect sense.

[Divine Discontent]

1664. that is a perfect word to describe some of the wretched ignorance around here - vulgar. Thank you!

[suzie]

1736. And I find it difficult to believe that anyone who has ever claimed to be a Democrat or supports

Democratic ideals would be a member of a forum like Old Elm Tree, where posters seem free to say the most racist things about Frenchie.

AND their vile statements get applauded by others who call themselves "progressives".

When I first started reading DU, I thought sometimes that as a Southerner I'm too quick to think that a person's statement or attitude is racist.

But then I read some of the forums at Old Elm Tree.

And sometimes "racist" is just racist.

[Stinky The Clown]

1297. So you can, or know someone who can, read PMs?

Please do tell.

[FrenchieCat]

1401. Thinking caps are in order on this.

If you got a PM from someone and sent it to the Mods, what breach of anything is that? Please you tell! :crazy:

[msanthrope]

1151. Don't you dare stay away Frenchie!!!!

They recruit using your name??? I'm a little jealous....

[rosesaylavee]

1415. Good post FrenchieCat

I hope you don't stay away permanently. You would be very much missed.

[Gormy Cuss]

1540. "for me, it is that negative outright contempt that I consider to be over the top, very destructive"

Absolutely agree with you on that. That's why I suggested upthread that GD: P be shuttered. It's contempt central. It's against the rules to call out specific posters but there are a handful of prolific posters in that forum who use contempt and handwringing over discussion and debate.

[Divine Discontent]

1662. that's some dramatic high-charge storylines you got goin' there!

If I was a recruitment tool for Democrats to leave one site to go to another, as you claim, I'd consider paying attention to state politics more, too.

[suzie]

1738. You are to be admired, Frenchie, that you've continued to post here despite the

presence of those who say quite vicious and vile things about you, and Obama, and DU, and Skinner, and anyone else who disagrees with them on other forums.

They're mostly silly people, I think, the kind one finds around a political campaign--who can never quite seem to grasp that it's about getting someone elected, not getting their own egos stroked.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

973. Question for Skinner re Factions

What about those of us who hate Obama on Mondays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, but love him on Tuesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays? (On Sundays we're deeply conflicted). Where do we fit in??? I DEMAND AN ANSWER!

This site has become completely infuriating. However, I just donated because I've been here since the beginning and I still find it indispensable and somehow can't stand to see it go under. The way I deal with all the infighting is just to tune all you people out. It works!

[seabeyond]

1049. i love this. nt

[unapatriciated]

1647. lol

hubby and I we saying exactly the same thing last night.

[defendandprotect]

977. Dear Skinner ....

I've read most of the thread -- have to go out now so will offer what I can --

The most important thing about DU -- and any website -- it is the level of INFORMATION

it provides --

That doesn't only come from ARTICLES printed -- but INFO the posters, themselves, offer

from their own knowledge of events and other available info.

#1 -- INFORMATION --


Unfortunately, NEWS ARTICLES are not being posted as vigorously as they once were --

I can assure you of that because I've frequently had to pick up the slack on important

articles which have not been posted --


As for personal contributions, that's also been harmed with a chilling effect from the

right wing here vs anyone who is critical of the administration. I'm sure you've noticed

that comments and articles by notable Democrats are slammed by the Obama cheerleaders here

because they are critical of his policies.


Also, the UN-REC is wrong because it is doing harm to your INFORMATION --

(Further we have a claim on this thread that the UN feature was begun to cut down on

articles "bashing Obama" from reaching the Greatest Page!)




And, the PURGES have evidently also hit your INFORMATION stream -- evidently they were

avid workers at picking up news immediately and getting it to us --

INFORMATION -- and smart comments -- is what brings DU respect and admiration --


Sadly, the "New Rules" also seem to be more censorship of free speech here -- and have

brought ridicule -- See Thom Hartman website on "New Rules"



#2 -- COMMUNICATION --

I think, as you can probably see from the responses to this thread, that you need to run

a feedback thread at least once a month. THAT way, we can all see legitimate complaints --

simply whining complaints -- and real complaints -- and BETTER UNDERSTAND what you are

going thru with messages sent to you --


#3 -- WE ARE HERE TO FIGHT THE RIGHT WING --

And, yes, you do have to choose sides on that one --

That means we are anti-corporate control of government and its agencies --

and anti-corporate control of our candidates and elected officials --

And that is the divide here --

And, no, there is no middle road which allows compromise on faked wars --

nor attacks on Social Security or Medicare -- or public education --

or anyone's human rights --


Underlying that, of course, is a very serious depression in America --

and, that has been brought to us courtesy of the right wing -- and it will

not go away by applying Wall Street solutions to it -- it will only worsen.

And so will your donation status!

[zeemike]

983. You will probably miss this because it is approaching 1000 posts

But I have been here from the beginning and during good times I have donated some.
And I am not now doing so not because I am disappointed with DU but because I am financially strapped with medical bills I cannot pay.
I still believe in this site and still think it has much to offer even though I thought things like the un rec function was a mistake.
But I would never withhold my support for any reason like that.

But now I am beginning to see some light at the end of my financial tunnel and I had already decided before you posted this to make a small donation because you guys deserve it for all that you have done....it won't be much but it will say thanks as best I can right now.

[ScreamingMeemie]

1002. Keep the money you were going to give to help pay for your medical bills.

Let me do this for you.

[zeemike]

1016. That is a very generous offer

But too late I already gave.
And it is OK now because I have almost recovered from the big hit....but there are others out there that need it more than me.
But thank you so much for the kindness.

[ScreamingMeemie]

1018. Too late here too...but you were worth it, even if it is double.

Take care of yourself. I'm off to greener pastures again. :hi:

[zeemike]

1023. Thank you...

I am humbled by your generosity.

[BellaLuna]

986. When you figure out how to not allow the OMCs to rule the roost..

when so many people were on to him from the beginning, you may have a chance of saving the place.

Someone has to get better at reading between the lines with those who have no purpose but to piss off real Democrats regardless of how left or moderate they are. Until then DU will continue to lose the best that have come here.

[crim son]

989. Most of my dearest friends seem to have abandoned DU

for various reasons, so I have migrated from the Lounge to the discussion forums... and from there, run for my life! There is nothing wrong with disagreement, but there is something seriously wrong with the way too many people here choose to voice it. Bitter personal attacks are the norm and I get a sense that folks aren't even vaguely interested in hearing the other side of the argument. What, therefore, is the point of participating?

That said, I will always come here to read the latest news and get a feel for what DUers are thinking. I feel like an outsider, but I keep coming back for more!

[Call Me Wesley]

1044. You're not an outsider,

you do know that, do you? :hug:

[ThomCat]

1165. Hey Crim son!

:loveya: :hug:

Same here.

[TK421]

1195. Hey! we gotta talk again soon...how you been?

:D

[SusanaMontana41]

991. Thank you, Skinner, and the mods

You're doing a great job.

DU still feels like home to me, even when we disagree. Debate and civility are becoming lost arts, but we on DU can save them.

Thanks again.

[smiley]

993. stop censoring 9/11 topics to the dungeon

and then maybe I'll donate.

[BootinUp]

1069. Do not stop sending 9/11 posts to the dungeon

and then I'll continue to donate. ;)

[uppityperson]

1006. Skinner, I have issues with some aspects of DU but also the economy sucks

No, I do not have $10 to give you. If I did, I would, but I don't. I do not know how I will manage to pay my normal bills with cars in the shop (twice in 2 days), need dental work, owe my doctor since my insurance bailed on me, etc etc.

My issues with DU are the continuing disruptors and what seems to me the inequality of banning. It would be good to have some notice as to why members are banned beyond "they know why, email mod/admin if you want to know more". Not gravedancing threads, but simply a reason as it is not obvious sometimes and it does really irk.

Thanks for having DU, onward we go. Wish the economy would pick up though, get jobs back.

[SoxFan]

1009. It's bad

You might have to cut down a tree to heat Stately DU Manor this winter.

[blogslut]

1022. I love DU

And while I've never had much money, these days I got close to nothing. I really don't think the slow fund drive is about our disagreements. It's about hard times.

[truedelphi]

1025. I can think of fifty people who were important members of this community who have been told

Not to come around here any more.

And now you want donations? From whom?

Succesful businesses do not make it hard for the customers to reach the counter with their goods.

And of course, someone who aimed a death threat at another member has been let back on.

But so many of my compadres here are TS'ed. For good apparently.

[Greyhound]

1102. .

and not for the first time either.

That was a huge mistake that many of the anonymous will not forgive or forget.

[Mimosa]

1241. That many?

True Delphi said
"And of course, someone who aimed a death threat at another member has been let back on."

True. That bugs me. But as long as good people like you are here, and so many others, including Bobbolink, I feel D.U. deserves support.

[LostinVA]

1289. ...

:thumbsup:

[Scurrilous]

1353. 1353rd

:thumbsup:

[okieinpain]

damn people don't like du. something is wrong. n/t.

[JuniperLea]

1028. I'll take this one, two, three...

One... money is tight all over. I never thought I'd be watching my wallet like I am now... and I'm one of the lucky ones with a good job and a roof over my head. Everything is more expensive; I haven't received a raise in three years.

Two... the hate here is killing me. Too many mean people, and they both suck and blow.

Three... please, please, PLEASE get rid of that goddamn rec/unrec! It is horribly divisive! It creates roving gangs of unreccers; we used to call them Troll Hunters on DKos (another place that went way beyond the gates of hell).

Four... Kudos for the new admin alert system. I still feel there are favors played... but that might be me... I'm not sure yet.

Five... something needs to be done about the sockpuppets of TS'd DUers returning.

Six... I'm sick to death of people furthering GOP memes... case in point: a Mosque at Ground Zero... It's neither, dammit! We used to be really good at fact checking, sticking to the facts, and correcting our own errors. What happened? I dunno.

Good luck, Skinner... I never know from day to day if I will be back here... and I never post here on weekends... I need a break... I did once or twice from my BlackBerry... left a nasty feel on my fingers:) I hope things settle down. I cannot believe it, but it looks like I'm one of the oldtimers now... I miss a lot of great DUers.

[seabeyond]

1058. your number one is right on with my number one.

isnt it something. lack of raises. increase in expenses. and not just a little.

and number 6... cheerleading it. rah rah. exactly.

but thumbs up to this post.

i really liked one. went back to school shopping second day in a row.... and i feel so totally different to spending money. gave a donation and i really wasnt.

i didnt spend in past, but i didnt cringe when i did.

[JuniperLea]

1194. When there are no raises, and prices skyrocket...

It's like taking a cut in pay! It truly is! It's really bad when gas prices go up... I sit at home a lot. It's a damn good thing that the pleasures of life I enjoy most are almost free. Three cups of coffee at Starbucks used to be a treat on the way to the beach on Sat. and Sun. mornings... but those three cups are $10.05 now... and the beach is $2 for parking, $6 if you stay more than three hours. Even the simple pleasures are expensive these days.

I just had to chuckle to myself... you know, the classic "personals" ad material... "long walks on the beach"... pft! That's me! For real! That's my favorite thing ever. So boring!

:rofl:

Oh well...

I read something the other day... it may have been here on DU for all I know. Someone said they put a $100 bill in their wallet... tucked away somewhere out of the normal cash area, and it helped them not to spend so much because they felt like they had something already. I've been thinking about that for days. I get paid on the first... I'm going to try it.

[BootinUp]

1059. +1

[Call Me Wesley]

1032. I'm not even American, but I still do believe in DU and it's purpose.

There are a few things I will not address, because they're mainly whimsical or small details that are better addressed in private.

I'll speak as a foreigner here who's married to a wonderful and progressive liberal American woman. As a foreigner who is accustomed to a multiple party system, direct democracy, single payer healthcare, gay union rights (although not fully yet, regarding adoption issues, but we're get there,) and whose 'conservative' political figures might even be, sometimes, not all the times - the idiots not accounted for, we all get them - left of Obama and most of the US Democrats.

It's not perfect. To be honest, it's way beyond perfect. But since we have more than just two main political parties, the criticism is very healthy and distributed. Looking back, it has brought the 'right' more to the social democratic left over the last years. The 'Socilism,' as some of you may recall it.

I remember the Bush years, and they glued us together; many prolific posters then united by the common enemy who depended on DU, and made the site as it is today, as the main community to have a common ground now abstain from posting or are frustrated, because things have changed.

A two party system will always be black and white. Third parties will be a joke, because there's no way for them to gather any power, and the US simply isn't ready yet for them. Perhaps once in the future, but sure not now. So you'll stick with two parties, and you'll stick with the black and white view; either yay or nay. Which is fine. Which I see here every day, the progressive left against the moderate middle of the US Democratic party. Debate is good, criticism is needed.

But you're all in the same boat, at least I hope you are. You only have one Democratic party. If you give it up, you won't have a Green President next time. You'll have a Republican one. Simple as it is. And with the recent upraise of the most vile right wing, you need to hold on every little straw you can. DU should be the community where you should find people who uphold these same thoughts.

Again, criticism is always needed. Looking at it from afar, Obama is the best that happened since Bush. Is he the best that happened to the ones who need health care, want to be equal and marry same sex partners, want to be out of any wars immediately and want change? Probably not, but he can lay some ground. There's a lot of compromises to swallow, and I'm with you, these things just don't go down well. Nobody wants to live on compromises. Welcome to the obscure world of politics.

In the end, it's not about being pro-Obama or anti-Obama. I personally find both stands rather delusional. But you have now a Democratic majority. Hold on to it. No matter how unpleasant it might seem. The alternative is even worse.

March separately but strike together. That's a Lenin quote, actually. Keep up the fight, but do it so under the tent of your party. And gave here, on DU, a community where you will find people who will join you in what you believe, in what you're rooting for.

And there's a lot of good people on DU that makes it worthwhile for this site to keep in existence. Alert on the idiots and trolls. Pick the only side you have, which is, for now, the Democratic side.

[nashville_brook]

1033. here's my idea -- license the software -- use "Emma" email marketing as your model.

Skinner, you say your heart just isn't in this anymore. And, the model itself is wilting b/c you're not generating revenue donations, and ostensibly ads if the traffic down.

You say you don't want to be in the business of message discipline, and I think that's a smart position b/c there's no business there. There's no market for all happy talk all the time. Everyone is on the same email lists. We all get the press releases. We need places to discuss, organize and generate action.

What I'm seeing repeated in this thread is that the DU model...the software itself...is valuable to posters. So license the software. Use Emma email marketing as a model. Be the Johnny Appleseed of internet forum communities. You could be the next Facebook guy.

Everyone with a successful business comes to this point, where you either have to change direction, let go of clients or enlarge your business model. Don't look at it as giving up on DU -- look at it as embarking on a larger mission.

[Sky Masterson]

1039. It's because of the lack of sex threads

(I keed,I keed)
I don't post as much because I frankly don't have as much to say anymore or an abundance of cash to throw around for donations.
This place has been very good to me. I do honestly miss the old days when flirting and goofing around was rampant.
Many good friends have floated on and a few have crossed over to be real life friends which wouldn't be possible without this place, So thank you for that.
Peace to all.

[seabeyond]

1061. throwing hands up in air

i swear, i swear just one post up i said, all these friggin post and not one was yelling for sex threads. geeez, see, du isnt so raunchy. and then what happens, lmao.... there you are. so funny. lol

[Sky Masterson]

1071. Bunch of prudes here these days :P

:D I think naked Fridays would do wonders for this place. :evilgrin:

[seabeyond]

1085. you first sky

lets see what you have to offer, lol.

actually, i like the posters suggestion where we could say fuck you. shut the fuck up. lol.

[Sky Masterson]

1087. This may not be the smartest thread to do that in :P

We need a STFU smiley!

[seabeyond]

1130. chicken. bawk, bawk, bawk....

a smiley stfu would work well.

[Sky Masterson]

1135. I resemble that remark

:P

[Romulox]

1054. Problem is--the Conservative posters are just as guilty, and not ONE of them has been TSed,

while dozens of left-leaning posters have. It appears that sides have been taken.

[seabeyond]

1063. tons of rw'ers have been deleted.

i will give you jsut two vagawg and paulsby.... i am bad at remembering names so cannot give a list. but hillbilly yesterday got tombstoned.

now

to the kitchen and cook.

[LostinVA]

1295. Those are the same person, you know

He had another one, too. I called him on his lies when he had less than 100 posts -- it was apparent he wasn't a Virginia Sheriff's Deputy, because of certain things he did. Hillbilly was a newbie troll. Those two should have been TSed ASAP. Their agenda was apparent from, literally, the first few posts.

I don't think CC infiltrators count, and that's one, or one and two socks, versus an awful lot of good, long-time DUers. including many, many GLBTers and allies. Many choose not to post her anymore. I didn't for a year. This thread shows my madness in being back here!

[seabeyond]

1349. i dont know lost.

the whole glbt i dont know about. i wasnt around when it was happening. i hear a lot, a lot of mention of it. so i just listen and dont have an opinion. but you and i side on one issue and we have often talked and been able to listen to one another. but i see that you stand on the obama issue in a particular camp. i didnt know until the other day. was surprised, but not cause of how you felt, but how you preceived du with that issue.

i dont get into the discussion with obama on this site. because discussion is not possible

you think of those that are attacked for criticizing obama.

i hear the same when obama does something right from the people that just doesnt like him and never gives him credit for anything

then again, there are people like me, that would like to talk about what we agree with, dont agree with without it being a dissing or cheerleading. since i never see that happening, i dont talk politics on a political board.

why shouldnt i be angry, because BOTH groups dont behave like I want. lol. ya know.

and lordy, i dont want to piss you off too, cause we may not see this eye to eye. but people i have gotten along with on this thread all of a sudden sees me as an enemy, (like we need sides or enemies) and i am not even playing the game. i wonder if people are too angry and set in their camps that discussion cannot happen.

ya know....

[LostinVA]

1357. Except I'm not in a particular "camp" on the "Obama issue"

And therein lays the problem. It is sad and disappointing you see it that way, because it is a policy issue, not a person issue. We do see eye to eye on certain things, and I don;t enagge you when I disagree with you on other issues, because we do respect one another on here. At least I hope we do.

[seabeyond]

1365. thumbs up, i got it.

i am tired. sigh. so many good people. so many at odds.

none of it is so easy. i dont see it simple or easy.

but i do miss a lot of people

[LostinVA]

1484. I miss them, too, believe me

:pals:

[kickysnana]

1067. Got paid today. Donated today. Feel better...

161,000 of us never call out other DUers. JFK Liberal here.

[grantcart]

1094. Your honesty is engaging.

Many people have contributed a lot of sincere ideas about forum or feature changes that might offer improvement.

No one has addressed and I have no possible solution to the problem that no one speaks to: that this site is under constant attack by people who consider the site administers "facist", and the Obama administration "criminal".

They get TS'd here for rules violations and then openly advise that they have returned here under another name to raise chaos.

They organize to coordinate attacks. They openly state that there goal is to have DU fail, then they put on Sunday clothes and appear here as members of the community, some on this thread.

Now if this did not exist some of the basic problems would still exist, but a relatively small group of 40-50 people organized to antagonize the differences can have a significant impact. Particular posters are identified with the clearly stated goal to bait and antagonize in angry conrontations until a poster gets TS'd, celebration threads are held when the objective is achieved.

I would like ot offer some elegant solution but you the admins have more experience and a more comprehensive view than I do. This is a bad quarter for me so I hope to make a contribution next one. I look forward to seeing what the admins consider as the best way to move forward.

[Ikonoklast]

1160. This is a real problem, and needs to be looked at.

Those people want both this president and the Democratic Party to fail, as they deem themselves the True Keepers Of The Progressive Flame, and no one that passes their purity test is a True Progressive.

And yes, some of them are in this very thread.

[loveandlight]

1095. just donated, wasn't going to but your post impressed me

I have been here at DU for a very long time. I mostly lurk, find the news and comments here valuable. More so in the past than recently, it is true. I consider myself a progressive or even more left than that, whatever that might be called. I am very discouraged about the debate that I find going on here all the time. More and more lately I find what I think is going to be an interesting thread and then it just disintegrates into name calling and uninteresting comments.

I would prefer an area that was more about policy discussions. I disagree with a lot that Obama is doing, but understand the practical side that he has limited potential and a huge right-wing that is making life for his administration miserable. I don't think he is using his potential very well, unfortunately, and is listening to the right side of the party more than the left, but that is another discussion.

I feel as some others have said in this long long discussion here that originally I came to this site because it was progressive. Now it is more just Democratic party, with a lot more folks on the right-side of things posting and getting into debate here. I find that disheartening. I want a site that discusses what we as progressives can do to move the party back to the left. I don't find that here very much any more.

I donated just now because I found your post from the admins to be heart-felt and understand the struggle you are going through trying to manage this site. I used to be a monthly donor. I stopped that a while ago because of two reasons - I have limited money and so because of that have to choose more carefully where I will spend it. I wasn't feeling the love here like I used to so I stopped my monthly donations. I gave a small amount now because I respect what you are trying to do here and do come here and read all the time, every day, so I still have hope that progressive will win out somehow.

Mostly I appreciate the hard hard work that the admins put in to try to keep this site going.

Thank you.

[leveymg]

1101. The term "let's talk" always gives me the willies. I donated.

Please don't fire me. I'll take a pay cut, no more $1,000 a post. I'll take half that. Please, I have a family . . .

[seabeyond]

1140. you're a guy aren't you, geeesh.

face all kinds of physical threats but a few words make you bulk.

cute

i love using the lets talk with hubby periodically, just to watch him quiver.

[leveymg]

1156. It works every time with me.

Works on three levels: 1) totally puts me into flight mode, 2) tells me I'm targeted; and 3) the gunner has me calmly in the cross-hairs.

How could things get worse than that, lady? You win, I'll pay for this round. :scared: :hide: :nuke: :beer:

[seabeyond]

1162. oh, just lmao. lol

oh, so sad.

thanks for the laugh

[leveymg]

1171. Thank you for the same.

You know how all the buttons and knobs work, don't you. Been married for a while?

Enough with the war and physical risk metaphors, already . . . ;-)

[SarahB]

1108. Unfortunatly, the underlined portion perfectly encapsulates the problem.

Imagine if during the Bush Administration, Democratic Underground had welcomed people who thought the president was doing a bad job, *and* people who thought the president was doing a good job.

The thing is Skinner, this is a false dichotomy,and it perfectly shows the bias that those of us on the "non-pragmatic" "side" have seen here lately from the administrators. First of all, when Bush was in office, maybe you didn't welcome people who thought he was doing a "good job", but you did welcome those who agreed with some of his policies. There was a vocal minority in favor of the Iraq War, for instance. Some of those posters are still here today. Secondly, even today DU welcomes posts celebrating Republicans for vote in favor of progressive policies (for instance, Olympia Snowe). In other words, even during the Bush years people who supported specific Republicans and/or specific "Republican" policies were welcomed here. The most important thing was that Democrats of all stripes be allowed to express their opinions.

What you have done, in this underlined passage, is essentially lump those who disagree with Obama's policies in with those who thought Bush was "doing a good job". This is insulting and shows that you do, in fact, have a bias in favor of what I'll call the "pragmatic" side. If you look over your, and especially EarlG's posts from about a year ago, you'll see this is the case. This is not "Obama Underground", this is "Democratic Underground", and there are plenty of very smart Democrats, both in office and on this site, who disagree with the President.

There are also many inconsistencies in the banning of members. It seems that the worst sin that can be committed on this site is publicly disagreeing with the administration. My husband, who was a moderator for several terms and who you once praised as very reasonable and fair, was banned for publicly calling out the administrators. Even he admits he should have been banned; that's not my point. However, when, after a year, he apologized, said he would not do it again, you did not allow him back in. Yet a longtime member whom you have publicly admitted threatened another DUer with bodily harm have been reinstated in less time.

I love this site. I met my husband here, got locally involved here, and have a lot of friends here. The tragedy, as I see it, is that you're too closely involved to take a good look in the mirror and admit where your biases lie.

That's my 2 cents.

[LostinVA]

1298. Very, very interesting and good post

I didn't know he asked to be let back in. Maybe he should have threatened to whack Omega.

It meant last to many people that he stuck up for the unfairly Purged.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1450. Very good point about the dichotomy. A striking way to

put it is that people who thought Bush was doing a good job had a view that DU held to be cosmically, metaphysically wrong.

Is the view that Barack Obama is doing a bad job cosmically, metaphysically wrong?

Of course not. It is obviously a legitimately debatable question. (That doesn't mean 50-50, but that well intentioned people to the left of center can reasonably disagree.)

So the two things are not comparable.

And how is it legitimately debatable here?

Not using RW lines of attack, but only from the left.

And that is all there is to it.

What is the alternative? Can we trash Ben Nelson but not Barack Obama? On what grounds? I think Nelson is crap but he's a "moderate" Dem.

If someone says Obama is a "moderate" Dem is that outlandish? Not is it true, but is it outlandish?

What if Obama becomes exactly like Ben Nelson? What then?

Will DU then post a sticky saying, "President Obama has turned into a real a-hole for some reason, so we have decided it's okay to tee off on the guy"?

Do you want a Tom Ridge color chart of how much criticism Obama warrants on a given day?

The best approach is let things go as long as the critique is from the left or from a center that is within Dem norms.


You must regulate the RW. No choice about it. If you also regulate the legit-but-strident LW then you are mandating "Middle of the Road Underground" which is an odd phrase.


BTW: I have at least as many leftys on ignore as ch***l**d*rs. There is no shortage of (whatever) on either side.

But the cheer side is more disruptive to DU, primarily because 1) anyone who acted that way from the critical side would be long gone and 2) their target is DUers.

[struggle4progress]

1112. Just donated

[Time for change]

1120. My opinion

I don't think that it is a problem that there is so much disagreement on Obama -- or anything else (Though of course few people actually enjoy it when people disagree with them). Disagreement is to be expected, and I believe, even encouraged. I really wanted to like and respect President Obama. But after being so disappointed by him so many times I find that more and more difficult to do, and I have come to the point where I would very much like to see him replaced by someone much more liberal than him in 2012. But that was a very difficult feeling to arrive at, and I don't find it the least bit surprising that so many people feel very differently about that.

In my opinion, the biggest problem is the very frequent lack of civility. It boils down to a very simple DU rule: "Treat other members with respect." That rule is routinely and frequently violated (including by some people I agree with on most things), but rarely enforced. We can voice our disagreements without trying to humiliate the person with whom we disagree. I believe that that kind of behavior should be tolerated a lot less than it is.

[Catherina]

1121. Be true to your old base Skinner and your problems will disappear. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

1175. Good! That would mean me too!

Kewl! :headbang:

[Catherina]

1444. Interesting interpretation

Interesting interpretation but I'm afraid that's not what I had in mind. The Ronald Reagan appreciation crowd is not who I had in mind at all.

Your post #4 in the
Obama supporters! The Ronald Reagan Appreciation Thread! only exemplifies the problem that's exacerbated by unwarranted accusations of racism, temper tantrums and foul language.

You've been deliberately, openly, mocking people with that avatar for months and the mods do nothing about it. Instead they delete posts asking you about it. There's nothing cute or "kewl" about about any of this.

[LostinVA]

1299. Hmmmmm

I said that during the Primaries, that this site would reap the discord that was sowed during and right after the election (Prop 8 and Rick Warren, especially).

[DCBob]

1131. This place is dominated by those who express the viewpoint that the country and world are f'ked..

and Obama and the Democrats are mostly to blame. Its nauseating.

[sendero]

1138. I'm not sure..

... that I'd immediately jump to the conclusion that donations are down because folks blame the "board".

Despite what you hear on Tee Vee the economy continues to worsen and more and more people are hunkering down.

If your traffic is also substantially down, well then your thesis is probably correct.

[Monique1]

1146. Skinner - you will make it

[JJ]

1149. The worst economy since the "Great Depression"

May be a large part of why people can't or won't donate. I know that is the reason for my lack of support over the last couple of years, you can't give what you don't have.

[dreamnightwind]

1155. Policy not Party, please

I care about issues, not party. Our country has spiraled to the right and, more importantly, to the rich, since the late 70's, probably earlier. We're now having horrible problems that are still being looked at through an outdated single axis model (left-right, or D - R) when there's a more important second axis, corporate vs. people. The old model is little more than a tool used to distract people from what's really happening on the corporate axis.

In this regard, DU and its rules fail me. The rules are set up for D - R thinking. I should not have to worry when criticizing a corporate agenda whether its supporter has a D or an R after his/her name. On DU that's not the case. When it comes to people like Hamscher (FDL) who takes some good stands against traditional party alliance to fight corporate agendas, I can be in a position of opposing Democrats. Just one small example.

I'd much prefer an environment that allows free pursuit of progressive solutions to the problems we face and makes no assumption that supporting a politician calling themselves a Democrat is supporting progressive solutions. They're too often at odds, and I'd be grateful if DU could somehow come to terms with this in a way that allows us to call out corporate agendas wherever they exist. I'd also be grateful if those who do support Dems would see people like me as an ally rather than as an adversary. I know that most of them share my beliefs in the kind of changes this nation needs, we just differ on how to get there.

[NorthCarolina]

1339. +1000 n/t

[DainBramaged]

1164. Thanks for clearing the air

You know whats best. Lot of folks here told you what's wrong. I agree with most of them, and rehashing the gripes isn't going to make a difference. Those who think people should be totally devoted to DU and not enjoy the rest of the Internet need to work on their perceptions. You got two days. It will get better.


It's your ball and bat.


Keep us posted


Dain

[tabasco]

1184. You made it open to everybody, even those who clearly do not support Democrats,

perhaps thinking that would increase your donations.

It turned it into a cesspool and I stopped donating.

[tabasco]

1187. Democrats have become reviled groundhogs.

Congrats on opening the floodgates to a bunch of utopian dipshits and trolls.

[DevonRex]

1209. True. Democrats are reviled woodchucks on a site called DU.

I can only assume that is the way the owners want it, since that's the way it is.

Thanks for your post, from one liberal veteran to another.

[Whisp]

1216. That mocking thread... how they were making fun of those who

supported the President.

it made me sick. The cartoon didn't, but the hyenas and the jackals here did.

apparently it's ok with the admin tho. I'm pretty tight with my money but I wouldn't pay to get abused in real life and I won't consider doing it here either.

[Hissyspit]

1235. Some are "reviled" as woodchucks on DU because of their fallacious logic

and critical thinking skills, not because they are Democrats (for the most part). Please reread the original Tom Tomorrow cartoon.

[DevonRex]

1240. Oh, but we aren't supposed to have any logic whatsoever. We aren't supposed to be practical at all.

Oh no. That would never do. Please note my sig line courtesy of Barney Frank, though, since he disagrees with that cartoon which has been used to ostracize and belittle so many DUers, just like YOU tried to do in YOUR post. Funny how that happened, isn't it? And I'm not surprised in the least. Disgusted as usual, but not surprised.

[Hissyspit]

1258. I didn't try to ostracize and belittle anyone.

Nonsense.

If you want to argue that the adoption of the woodchuck character here, used by Tom Tomorrow because he's a, um, cartoonist, is uncivil in many or most instances, that's a valid issue, but my post wasn't about that, it was about the misrepresentation of the intent of the cartoon in the previous post. The cartoon is clearly not an attack on DEMOCRATS in toto.

Fallacious arguments and sophistry are fallacious arguments and sophistry. They are unsupportable and often just flat out embarrassing. I want the President to succeed and I want to support this administration and keep Republicans out of office. As far as I know from what I have learned in my life, this shouldn't be done using fallacies and pretzel logic and papering over previously held principles, because it won't work. I guess I could be wrong.

[NC_Nurse]

1196. I don't feel that bad about the infighting. We've always had some of that. I'm

Just kinda broke at the moment. I try to keep my donations to once a year here so I can donate to things like the Pakistan crisis, which I just did. It has nothing to do with how DU is at any given time.

I also take breaks now and then from political topics to keep my sanity. Not because I don't feel the same about this place, but because the discourse in this country IN GENERAL has become so antagonistic. It's everywhere, not just here. It's been all out war of words on Obama by the Repubs since the inauguration pretty much. And a new group to hate every week. Ugh.

Compared to the regular media and other discussion boards I've seen, this place is quite civil :-)

Thanks for the note Skinner, maybe you need to stop reading your email for a while. People need to calm down and remember it's a freaking Internet board, not their family! Back away from the computer and relax for a while.

[Liberty Belle]

1204. I think the problem is the economy, Skinner, not DU.

In the past six months I've earned no more than a couple thousand dollars. There is just not an extra penny. All my magazine clients that I used to write for went under. An editing job I had went in-house as the company moved out of state and cut all freelancers. Our son, a college grad, still has no job and has moved back home, so another mouth to feed.

Meanwhile we're seeing our water and electricity rates jacked up, tuition for our daughter through the roof, and no relief in sight.

I started a nonprofit news outlet that now has humongous circulation and everybody says they love it (well, almost everybody, except those who have been skewered), yet we're barely bringing in enough donations to stay alive.

So...keep up the good work, do whatever is needed to keep doors open, and I will donate when I can.

[theFrankFactor]

1213. Democratic "Underground", That's What I Thought.

You sprayed a fire hose on me. I come around but I can't be me. You get what you ask for. Criticism of our party and our President, I thought, would be best done by us. Not so, or, 'okay just be nice'. FUCK THAT! "Underground", please. That would be a place with boundaries expanded, new and unconventional views, adults, a place to birth new policy initiatives and shape the party. Not a fucking tea party.

I won't use your bandwidth except by a bare minimum.

[theFrankFactor]

1214. Democratic "Underground", That's What I Thought.

You sprayed a fire hose on me. I come around but I can't be me. You get what you ask for. Criticism of our party and our President, I thought, would be best done by us. Not so, or, 'okay just be nice'. FUCK THAT! "Underground", please. That would be a place with boundaries expanded, new and unconventional views, adults, a place to birth new policy initiatives and shape the party. Not a fucking tea party.

I won't use your bandwidth except by a bare minimum.

[LisaM]

1215. I donated because of this email, but had to think about it

I, too, am tired of the bannings. I think the problems started in the primaries. I have been on this board since 2001 and I got tired of being excoriated for my primary choice and being excited by the prospect of a woman president.

I got tired of fending off criticism when I complained about how the caucuses in the state where I live were stacked in favor of one candidate, and when I complained that my family in my home state of Michigan didn't even get to vote in the primaries, and people cheered the Democratic Party's decision on that.

I get tired of the relentless criticims of teachers, who put themselves on the front line of poverty and ignorance with dwindling respect and support.

I get tired of people who didn't want the industries that are the backbone of my home state of Michigan saved.

So, Skinner's email moved me and I did make a donation this time. And I'll see what happens. Yes, I am a bit crusty and wounded these days. Not the DU it was back in 2004, that's for sure (though I think the seeds of infection started there).

[Whisp]

1218. o please not that Michigan shit again.

ffs

[nadinbrzezinski]

1227. Why not, because you think it is not important?

Validating somebody else's feelings is part of good people skills, just saying.

[Whisp]

1232. Yes, it is important. Not in the way you mean tho.

this sour grape orchard is partly to blame for the divide. some people cannot let go and refuse to deal with realities. She Lost.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1237. Most folks have let go of the primaries

but a small chorus has not. Every time anybody issues VALID criticism of the President, and no, he is not god, nor does he walk on water, nor is he perfect, the primaries come gushing out.

I have been told similar things by a very small, at most 30 posters. What makes me laugh is that most people do not even know who I supported in the Primaries... and that is fine... suffice it to say it wasn't Obama, and when I got to vote, it was pretty much over. SO it was a symbolic vote. I am sure that would never cross your mind.

Free clue, it is not Lisa who has been doing this since the primaries ended, and what happened with the primaries (on both parties by the way) should raise a few alarms to those who are students of democracy. In fact, there are a few reforms our system might benefit from, which will not pass because partisans, and chiefly leadership, ON BOTH PARTIES fear losing control of the process.

[LisaM]

1238. I'm sorry. I thought we could speak about things that bothered us in this thread.

Apparently, I misunderstood.

[LostinVA]

1301. (you forgot teh gays)

I just defriended you on FB.

Of course, I'm lying about that.

[Mimosa]

1221. The bad economy is what keeps people from donating PLUS....

because we see advertising we probably figure that is paying for the site.

I just donated what I could.

[Usrename]

1222. I think this place used to have character.

The dishonesty begins with the unrec feature, and ultimately ends with folks getting lerkfished.

This place will continue on its downward spiral unless and an until it regains a sense of decency.

[RetroLounge]

1226. Well, at least your lounge mods managed to end my daily poem thread

and allow a swarm to take over the lounge and be allowed to burp all night.

and your mods ran off and/or TSd a large group of progressive LGBT members here.

and your mods allow the GDP swarm to attack anyone who disagrees with policy as Obama Haters.

I mean, what's not to love?

RL

[pmorlan1]

1233. K & R

I just made a $25 donation. Sorry it can't be more.

[Samantha]

1249. Just a short note to you, Skinner

I haven't contributed to this fund drive because I am broke. I will put a small check in the mail anyway after reading your thread.

I do not think you and the others can completely "control" DU and the things that make some unhappy. Maybe some of us don't post as much any more because we are overwhelmed with the vitriol of some of the things said here and it is simply too depressing to face it every night. That doesn't mean our love for the website has diminished. If one has been here a long time, one might find it impossible to simply walk away and forget DU. Things will get better, somehow, someway. But no Herculean effort made by you and others with you can put DU back together again especially before this next election. It is the ugliest election season I have ever seen, taking into account the sheer duration of the vile, and the depths to which it has sunk from so many corners. People I never dreamed could sink so low in the public eye sink lower every day.

Thanks for everything you have added to my political life through allowing me the privilege of being a member here.

Sam

[pipoman]

1252. I'm feeling ya'

I seldom chime in on your threads because I feel I have no right since I am only a 5 year 5,000 poster...who also has strong 2nd amend feelings. When I came here I was a centrist who sometimes leaned left and other times right. Since I have been here I find myself farther left than I ever believed and it is right for me (no pun intended).

What I really wanted to say is that I recently changed profession into hospitality. My inclination is to be very conforming to my restaurant regulars. This customer wants just a bite of ice cream at the end of the meal, so I oblige. That one wants 2 tea bags with her tea, fine. Pretty soon we have the guy who wants the ice cream also wanting 2 tea bags, and we need a computer main frame to store all of our rule and price variances. I have decided that we must never waiver from the rules. If you want 2 tea bags, well then you will just have to buy 2 teas. It seems cold and impersonal but it really is the only way to keep order and keep everyone happy. People like hard and fast rules even though they say they don't.

Good luck with this trying time and thanks for your effort...and with that another donation..

[nadinbrzezinski]

1253. Skinner before you decide on radical surgery

I have spent the day reading this thread... and yes we have some of the usual fights. But you know what? Most people are broke. They are telling you that. This is what you are seeing.

It also explains some of the rancor, but that is another story.

And it is not just you. I get money requests from many places. Truth be told I gave here... but even that I had to pull deep.

[sellitman]

1256. David, for all practical purposes I have been unemployed for almost 2 years

I have 2 in College now and one more with only one more year of High School left before I hopefully have 3 in College.

That is the sole reason I have not donated.

Things are getting dicey. I know I am far from alone on this and frankly have only mentioned it so you don't think it's because I have a thin skin or a beef with DU.

When I get back into the workforce I will make up for it.

Cheers,

Kevin

[Kurovski]

1280. I've been gone for a while, Is the Unrec feature working out well?

I can see dividing lines in action there. Un'reccing is a negative action. Enough negative action is bound to take its toll.

The economy is horrendously bad, yes. People are on edge from that alone.

[lostnfound]

1286. Creativity comes from the tension of the opposites. Your inner tension is useful and inevitable.

C.G. Jung: "All opposites are of God, therefore man must bend to this burden; and in so doing he finds that God in his "oppositeness" has taken possession of him, incarnated himself in him. He becomes a vessel filled with divine conflict."

When I check out DU (at least 5 times a day..) I read the arguments one way or another, sometimes feel uncomfortable with one side or another -- both attackers and defenders, so to speak -- but often I learn exactly where the lines are drawn in my own judgment, and sometimes I change the lines of my own judgment. It is worthwhile. Jung considered the inner debates we all have with ourselves to be an essential feature of life, an 'inner work' for each of us, in which we must bring to personal consciousness the nature of the conflicts within ourselves, and into collective consciousness the nature of the conflicts we have as societies. When asked if he had hope for the world, he said "yes -- as long as enough people do their inner work".

Your feelings of conflict -- over having to be authority figure but being skeptical of authority; of having to delete posts and ban people but not liking how it makes you feel -- won't go away, and they may be particularly painful right now, but a process of consciousness-bringing occurs at DU precisely because you allow that tension within yourself to exist. Because of it, you are helping to creatively shape the kind of dialog that goes on in this forum, and the kind of bringing-to-collective-consciousness that occurs because of the efforts of people here to explain what is on their mind and to try to absorb opposing points of view and to reconcile their own differing interpretations. If you're in some pain about it, maybe you should actually be a little proud of that pain, because it represents that you put your soul into what you do here, and realize it is all for a good purpose.

We all want to be liked, and we all want to be good parents (whether to our children or our projects or our creative acts) - and those two things are often in deep conflict with each other even though they are as interwoven as yin and yang.

[Seneca]

1293. Lassie, Come Home!

Ahhh, Sam thought, there’s nothing like toenails for scratching behind your ear. Damn fleas.

The pit bull was seated at the feet of his master, Demenides, a second-rate Greek philosopher. When finished with the spot behind his ear, Sam sniffed his toes, and then nibbled a fleabite on his stomach. The tiles of the courtyard were still cool that morning, so he lay there and enjoyed the sunshine. Sam might later dig a hole in the garden shade, but at that moment he could tolerate to be where the action was: beside the old wooden bench his master sat upon.

A new human was visiting. Cortexicus didn’t watch where he walked, and his feet smelled like Parmesan cheese. Sam didn’t know if he trusted the guy. The human had brought along a dog he recently purchased-”Lassie.” Sam wondered, What kind of sissy Sumerian name is that? He greeted Lassie with a wag of his stub tail and the customary sniffing. Lassie performed only a perfunctory greeting. Was she dissing him? Lassie’s coat was flawless, and it had the aroma of green apples.

Lassie lay at attention, facing the humans. Although the collie had a long snout and her eyes looked a bit crossed, she was self-assured and relaxed. Sam liked that in a dog.

From the sleeve of his robe, Cortexicus pulled out a bone. Small shreds of meat hung off it. Sam’s mouth watered. Cortexicus tossed the bone to the far side of the courtyard, and not for a second did Sam wonder why a guy who showed such dexterity with words could be so bad at transferring a bone to a dog’s mouth. The pit bull chased it down and brought it back to his spot. Lassie seemed uninterested in it.

Cortexicus made a comment about dogs and simple pleasures. Sam saw one of Lassie’s eyebrows lift. “The blissful ignorance of a dog . . .” Cortexicus said. “Knowledge can be a great burden we thinkers must bear.”


Demenides said, “how true!”

What a “brown-nose,” Sam thought. It was clear that Cortexicus was the alpha of the group. Demenides was the beta, and he was the gamma. Where did that put Lassie? She didn’t fit in.

Lassie rose to a sitting position. She looked at Cortexicus and said, “Would you deny that what a dog can know is influenced by the nature of the dog?”

So eager was he to engage in discourse of any form, Cortexicus didn’t seem surprised that his new dog could talk. He replied, “of course not.”

Lassie said, “A dog’s understanding of the world reflects the dog’s nature. To put it another way, what a dog knows reflects the dog’s abilities and passions.”

Cortexicus gave a cautious nod.

“For instance, the two highest virtues to a dog would be scents and”

“–Ah, yes, to make sense of the world-” Cortexicus interrupted.

“No,” Lassie corrected him, “to make SCENTS in the world.”

“Yes, the dog is confined to its world. That is where it would naturally make sense.”

Lassie was a bit annoyed by Cortexicus jumping in. Sam could tell. Lassie said, “The dog makes scents and finds scents in its world. This is the dog’s highest virtue, or truest passion.”

Cortexicus stiffened his neck and frowned. “I don’t know if I agree about a dog having virtues, but you may know more about the dog than I do.”

“The dog’s second highest virtue is pursuit.”

“Ah, the pursuit of truth-” Cortexicus just couldn’t shut up and let Lassie finish her thought. But Lassie persisted. “Pursuit is an indelible part of the dog’s character”

Now Demenides interrupted, to excuse himself and make his way toward the place that human beings dropped their droppings. As he exited, his head brushed the lowest frond of a palm tree.

Sam was so interested in what Lassie had to say he had hardly touched his bone.

“Pursuit, and to make and find scents, these are the dog’s highest virtues, which of course reflect the nature of the dog.”

“Certainly, the dog is limited by its status in the natural world, and-” Cortexicus said.

It was Lassie’s turn to interrupt. She said, “–now, a human being, on the other . . . extremity . . . might claim that goodness and truth or some such things, are the highest virtues. But it must be understood that these are human virtues. Not the highest virtues, but the highest human virtues.”

“Surely you joke.” Cortexicus could not believe what he had heard.

“I am serious.”

“You err, my furry companion. The human mind is able to perceive the ideal, hence is capable of knowing absolute virtues.” Cortexicus was about to go on a roll.

But Lassie stopped him in his tracks. “I can’t grant you that,” she said. Lassie was so relaxed and confident in her delivery–Sam could see there was a new alpha in the making. The bright Collie continued, “What I’m trying to say is that human knowledge is influenced and limited by the nature of the human being, just as a dog’s nature influences what it knows about the world.”

Cortexicus leaned forward. “Here is where you are wrong,” he said, his face flushed red. “The human is capable of transcending nature and perceiving absolute truth. We . . . we have immortal souls.”

Immortal souls?” Lassie echoed. “You eat, sleep, fornicate and die just like us canines.”

“But, but there’s more to us than that!”

“I can’t see it. Must be your imagination.”

“Cortexicus looked like he was about to bust a vein. “We’re different!”

Lassie glanced at Sam, knowing he’d understand, and he did. They both rolled their eyes. Lassie told Cortexicus, “Sorry to give you such a crass reality-check, but have you smelled your own . . . ahem . . . lately? Seems to me you’re chasing your thoughts in circles.”

Cortexicus slammed the bench with his fist. “I pity your lack of insight. You’re just a stupid dog!”

And then, like that, Lassie started barking. She told Cortexicus that he was just a stupid human. But Cortexicus couldn’t understand.

Cortexicus said, “Oh shut up, or I’ll send you back to the market.” At that moment Demenides returned to the courtyard bearing a platter of sliced pears and cold mutton. He and Cortexicus alternately ate and talked. Cortexicus did most of the talking.

Lassie lay down and rested her muzzle on the ground. She sighed. A few pebbles went rolling.

Sam resumed gnawing on his bone. If you asked Sam, there’s no greater pleasure than a good bone.

--- Andrew Bernardin

[Joey Kidd]

1475. Hum...

Although you credited the author,I wonder if this could be a copyright infringement? These days a very short sentence can be considered plagiarism if not properly attributed to the original author.

[Seneca]

1531. It's a vanity piece

No royalties, and in the public domain.

It's attributed. Not much you can do about that. If I were as dishonest as some people on DU, I would claim to be the author named, but I am not that crass or narcissistic.

Save your copyright worries for LBN.

[Shining Jack]

1591. delete

Wrong place.

[Danger Mouse]

1303. I hope all of us eventually come to a solution...together.

:grouphug: For the most part, we all want what's best for our community.

[saltpoint]

1307. David, it might be interesting for DU's admins to hold

a private on-line forum between you and handful of other blog admins.

Josh Marshall, Kos -- whoever you want.

But some sort of round robin or other, where you three can ask for responses to specific questions, and where they can offer perspectives and suggestions.

You can bring home what's useful and see if it fits into any change you plan to make.

[Caretha]

1308. Sorry

I got a dip of $6000 less this year in my salary and it hurts a lot. I'm watching my pennies but I love DU, it keeps me informed and on my toes. I can't even afford a star this year.

Sorry Skinner, I'll help if things turn around :(

PS Also, had a daughter that had to move in with me and I had to help her too. She finally got a job that lets her go back to school and picked up a scholarship also.

[w8liftinglady]

1309. Does it help if I say.."I love you all like family?"

sometimes...families get on each other's nerves...but when the chips are down,we come together.You've been that for me.Thanks for seeing me through it all with hope and support.I'm here.You ain't getting rid of me that easy.
Love you guys.
Beth

[UpInArms]

1317. nice post, Skinner - thanks

I had to wait for money in the bank to donate - it's here and it will be yours shortly.

I have a request. I'm not certain you'll even read this post - but I'm going with it anyway.

If someone "unrecommends" a thread, that person's username should automatically appear in the thread with the statement "this user hit the unrec button" - whether as a mistake or on purpose - it doesn't matter.

I am sick and tired of people censoring the news - I refuse to believe that just because I find something offensive (the mosque in the hot zone is an example) - but that doesn't mean it should not be there - there are freedoms that are being taken for granted and there are reasons for those freedoms and if we don't know the difference - we should be exposed for our bigotry.

Same here at DU - expose the bigotry - quit letting folks hide behind a tool that allows them to destroy legitimate discussion.

thank you for your time.

uia - here since 2001

[Safetykitten]

1320. Somethings gotta give....maybe if

We as Democrats here just agreed on maybe one simple thing. Just spitballing here, but what if Skinner made a policy that any posts that engage in the constant subsequent banter about gay rights are deleted. Just deleted.

But first make a policy satement that what President Obama believes is a divergence from what is required as poster here, namely complete equal rights for gays. It is recognized and noted, but any attacks on President Obama about it will not be allowed.

That would stop arguments in it's tracks. The long range, down the road, we will get to it view, with the it's not enough will stop.

Gay posters will not have to constanly defend themselves, or constantly be under attack by bring up what the President has not accomplished.

Isn't it time to just admit it?

[Frisbee]

1323. Don't look now...

But I think we make it! Maybe just barely, but we make it!:)

[Shell Beau]

1327. Ok, let's talk. Quite honestly I haven't seen much talking from you at all.

Not trying to kick you while you are down, but "let's talk" usually means more than just us on this side. I don't post here anymore for many reasons. I would like it to be the "old DU", but part of that means to me is you participating more on the discussion side. I understand you have a lot on your plate from the administrative point, but IMO you need to be active in discussions with us. Very rarely have I seen you participate or any of the other admins. Even in this discussion now. You've participated very little. Maybe you are taking it all in, but if you believe we've spoken, then answer us. Not just with an OP and a few remarks. Get in it.

Also, you HAVE to confront some things you've not confronted before. Many here in this very thread have asked about the GLBT "purge". Many many have asked about it before. If you've talked about it, I've missed it, and I apologize. But when the masses ask questions, you have to answer. It is the fair and right thing to do. Address that. It needs to be done. It isn't forgotten. Nor will it ever be.

[Joey Kidd]

1364. "Many here in this very thread have asked about the GLBT purge."

Many of those posts have been deleted.:(

[Number23]

1333. Long Live the BOG!

I'm sorry. I know some people take this whole thing so seriously, but the idea that the BOG is the root of all evil is just so damned stupid I couldn't help myself.

The fact that folks have such a problem with a group that supports the Democratic president on a Democratic web site (and this group also represents and reflects the true diversity of the Democratic party, if I may add) -- if that doesn't highlight the true crux of the problem with this web site then I'll be damned if I can think of a better thing that does.

Best of luck to you, Skinner. Wouldn't want to be in your shoes for all the beagles in Beagletown. And fwiw, I won't be donating until something is done about the constant maligning of this President. No source too slimy. No lie too big. No issue too small for those who are determined to trash this President. If that's what floats their boats, that's fine but I ain't sending my money to help them out.

[Safetykitten]

1341. "I won't be donating until something is done about the constant maligning of this President."

Try being gay and giving money to get him elected.

[Number23]

1354. I don't subscribe to the view that every gay person is unhappy with this admin

Five minutes even on DU would disprove that point, let alone in every day encounters and conversation.

The gay community is as diverse as any other. And even lots of unhappy gay Americans don't go out of their way to dog the president at every turn.

[Shell Beau]

1410. Well a lot of people don't subscribe to the view of having to keep

their mouths shut because they aren't gung ho. And people come here to vent, talk, discuss, laugh, cry, yell, praise. That is why this place is here. Or so it used to be. We should all be able to come here in some sort of civil fashion and be able to discuss whatever. What is bothering us. What is making happy. What is scaring us. What we are looking forward to... All of that. Good and bad.

[Number23]

1425. I don't recall anyone suggesting otherwise.

[LostinVA]

1485. Of course they do, all the time

[Scurrilous]

1358. Long Live the BOG!

:thumbsup:

[SoxFan]

1361. +100

[Hekate]

1651. Hear, hear!

Plus we have us some fun over there, from time to time. It's not serious all the time: I did bring virtual coffee and donuts for one of our parties. And beer.

DU outside the BOG has gotten morbidly serious.

If Number 23 isn't there we'll have to think of someplace else to have the next party. :-( There must be an empty office in this building we can use, someplace with a defunct xerox copier in the corner....

Hekate

:donut: :donut: :donut:

[grantcart]

1741. But but but

The BOG is such a depressing place full of anti-nihilistic anti-gloomy pronouncements about the successes of Democrats and constantly not attacking those Democratic office holders that actually don't spend hours smashing very hard on the keyboard but spend long long hours trying to advance the interests of the Democratic Party.

One thing that should definitely be changed however.

The time has come to stop dragging every DU visitor down to the BOG. Do the administrators really think it wise to forceable drag every single visitor down to the cesspool of cheerful, intelligent, informed Democrats that are engaged in supporting the President? I think all DUers should support the priniciple that all visits to the BOG should be made VOLUNTARILY.

Of course if we could eliminate the BOG then visitors to DU would not have to wonder if this was a site that actually consisted of people who were committed to progressive change and the Democratic Party, all ambiguity would be eliminated.

[DisgustedTX]

1337. I can not donate now that business hours have returned.

The filth has raged unmitigated for years and has been allowed to return.

It offers nothing.

[Withywindle]

1340. It's economic for me, Skinner.

I hope to have a significant freelancing check come through soon, but I've learned I can't necessarily count on that company to be timely--they're struggling hard.

I know what you're saying about the civility and divisions and I get it and it bugs me too, but that's not the reason I haven't donated yet.

Just so you know.

[G_j]

1342. best thread I've read in a very long time

in part, because there are comments here that would have most likely been deleted under under other circumstances. Do you see how much more compelling, intelligent and adult a conversation/debate can be?
There are so many thoughtful and informed people around. I think it's better to just let them be that. As much I want to urge you to do something about uneven application of the rules, I would really rather see less rules and more trust.

[BootinUp]

1368. I think its a pretty horrible thread

the site owner administrator laments the atmosphere and nicely asks for opinions and he gets a flame fest, even gets brow beaten by some. I think he should tell folks how its going to be and those that don't like the rules can take a hike.

This is a *moderated* forum, a lot of effort goes into making it an inviting place for liberals, yet some are determined to advocate their positions in any obnoxious way they can with no consideration for the other members.

From what I can tell, the netroots movement will stagnate for awhile until it takes a chill pill. Democratic party politics are more effective when there is a more generally positive atmosphere. If what members want is a small band of angry folks then we are headed in the right direction.

[Shell Beau]

1376. It is also a forum that is kept going by the money from the members.

If the people are upset for whatever reason, it should be heard.

[G_j]

1382. your opinion of course, admittedly, I skipped through it

but I appreciated those who actually took the time to explain their views. I think some view points were laid out quite intelligently and most important, honestly.

[jgraz]

1391. Have you considered trying out for the Olympic Not Getting It team?

Skinner has told people how it's going to be and they have taken a hike. Hence the shitty fundraising results.

I have to guess you've never run a business in your life. Most of us don't get to tell our customers "it's my way or the highway -- now gimme some money."

[LostinVA]

1487. Or refuse to even respond to legit "customer" complaints

And then wonder why the customer quit shopping there.

[LostinVA]

1486. The thread is exactly what Skinner asked for

[XOKCowboy]

1343. I wish I could donate but just can't afford it.

Love this place. Gives me info, makes me think and pisses me off. Unfortunately I have to get my knee replaced and can't work. I'm working with my native american tribe to get health care but it's a slow process and I'm now digging into my savings. I just can't spare any money for donations. I need all I have right now.

Good luck and I'm sure the DU community will come through.

[XOKCowboy]

1406. Thanks for the donor star! There are some great people here..

I appreciate it whoever you are!

[Toucano]

1351. The only radical change needed is to stop taking ourselves so seriously.

It isn't rocket surgery.

If you heart aches and you lie awake at night, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it's not because of "what DU has become". And I suspect that deep down, you know what's really troubling you.

Granted, I don't visit as often as in the past, but I don't find the current DU to be all that different.

We've always had factions and substantial differences among us. That DEFINES us. Deadly earnest opposites one minute, brothers from another mother the next.

We're not like the other side, with their one communal brain cell.

It's just an internet message board. Just people passing in and out, some days urinating on the wall, some days painting a Picasso in the same damp spot. Electrons spin and bounce and sometimes leave an echo, but they're still just electrons.

The gift you've given your community is a safe place to vent. We can connect with one another or not. We can bruise and be bruised by one another...or not. Things written here have as much importance or affect us to the extent we allow them to.

Despite whatever defect you perceive, DU is still a great community and a valuable resource. I don't advise "radical" changes. Your baby is just a teenager in a phase. She'll out grow it. If you allow her to.

[rosesaylavee]

1355. There are a couple of things you aren't doing this fundraiser...

The splash screen as you enter DU reminding us there is a fundraiser is not on and there were no PM reminders either. Those may be helpful to remind people as they come on or ... perhaps there are many here who don't logged on as often as we used to, like me, that have notices sent to their emails when they have PMs in their message center here.

I care about this place. It kept me sane while the criminals were in power. It keeps me informed now. No, I don't like the wrangling here. Didn't during the primaries either. I just skip those threads that start the back and forth and look for others that have better information and less pissing and fro-ing. And no, I am not happy about all that President Obama's administration has done or proposes to do. Overall I think they have done a lot considering the corruption they have to wade thru in DC. Almost none of the measures pushed thru are what I wanted them to be but hopefully these are steps toward what we will get if we maintain or increase our majority this fall.

Skinner, you are a young dad and you work long hours. Remember sleep is important to maintain your emotional and mental health. Take a complete B vitamin every day... maybe extra... and hopefully that will turn your attitude around about this place. It has ALWAYS been combative. Not going to change. And I am sure it's been said upthread, but the trolls have been learning... perhaps breeding smarter too for all we know. Take a vacation... bring a fresh face to the scene and I am sure you will see the DU you love again.

Warm regards,

rosesaylavee

PS. Being a good liberal (or former RC - not sure which is strongest), guilt works on me. I will donate as soon as I post this. :)

[Chipper Chat]

1360. Hey Skinner!

I was holding off because I wanted to SMACK Marco Rubio.
Just donated!! Thanks for the lecture.

[Grassy Knoll]

1363. I'm just waiting to punch Angle in the mug ! n/t

[bdamomma]

1367. thanks skinner

I still like being her and even if the drive is over I will try to give a donation to keep DU going.

[Ohio Joe]

1384. Close but... not exactly right

In my case it has a bit more to do with the whole unemployed for two years and on the verge of being homeless kind of thing.

[Violet_Crumble]

1395. I stopped donating to DU a fair while ago...

It's got nothing to do with the stuff you said, but because DU now seems to be far more tolerant of those who have viewpoints that are consistently conservative and who in one case repeatedly appears in threads attacking DU (eg 'DU hates cops' 'DU is insensitive') and who started a gravedancing thread when a long-term DUer who was most definately left-wing was banned. Plus, things have gone totally downhill in the I/P forum and there appears to be little interest in listening to what DUers have to say about the forum, nor in addressing the problems that have appeared over the past year or two there. That's why I won't donate...

I don't expect things to be open and transparent when it comes to moderating decisions, but the flat-out refusal to say anything about why people are banned just plays into the hands of people who get banned and want to portray themselves as innocent victims. I'm sure most of their friends will still beleive their version, but for the vast majority of us who just see people vanish, it really would help for us to know why they were banned. I keep on hearing about some 'purge' of the LGBT forum and if I were to believe what I read, they were all totally innocent people who deserve apology and reinstatement, but if that 'purge' was anything like the 'purge' of the I/P forum a few years ago, those who were banned weren't innocent in the whole thing and did break the rules and deserved to be banned. I read some posts in this thread asking that some banned DUers be reinstated and I notice they're only asking for the people they approve of to be reinstated. It'd be unfair to only let some people back and not others, and there are people who were banned for very good reason and I don't want any of them back. I saw an amnesty happen at another forum and it drummed up traffic for a few weeks but the board self-destructed from the weight of disruptive ex-members reappearing and doing the same stuff that had led them to being banned in the first place...

Please don't cater to either 'side' when it comes to Obama. Polarising DU even further wouldn't be good and I'm sick of those who can't tolerate any criticism of Obama just as much as I'm sick and tired of those who let their dissapointment with him push them into an Anything But Obama mindset and in some cases to advocate the defeat of the Democrats.

[LostinVA]

1488. The LGBT DUers and allies did not deserve to be Purged

And, it is actually quite insulting for you to say otherwise, especially when you yourself say you don't know the situation.

[Violet_Crumble]

1503. So yr claiming all of them were completely innocent and didn't break any rules?

Let me insult yr sensitivies even further by calling bullshit on that one. Like I said, I have had experiences of people complaining about purges* from the I/P forum, and in most of the cases the people claiming absolute innocence were peddling a story that turned them into innocent victims and somehow the DU rules weren't supposed to apply to the way they posted. Didn't realise things were so vastly different when it came to the LGBT forum and over there everyone involved is so totally innocent and didn't do anything wrong ;)

* in the interests of referring to the grievances of both 'sides' in the I/P forum, the pro-Israel DUers don't use the term *purge* - they call the tombstoning of more than one of them in a short period of time as a *pogrom*. And I've seen disgruntled ex-DUers insisting that they were victims of a *pogrom* because they're Jewish and they don't mention a word about what they were actually banned for...

[NuttyFluffers]

1399. Never had money to donate, but still think the Viper Pit forum idea has merit here.

let uncontrolled, uncensored vitriol have a place on these forums, just be very strict that such vicious behavior cannot escape the pit.

most other forums do the same and for the most part things are civil. in this way you never have to choose a side -- you just let people reveal themselves how petty and bigoted they can be. a clean solution for those involved.

[BrklynLiberal]

1403. K&R. Too late to read this all tonight. Marking for tomorrow.

[Kaleva]

1405. My wife says I can't donate now.

We are trying to finish remodeling a house so we can move in soon. I don't argue with her as she still allows me to buy cigarettes. A $5, $10, or $25 donation wouldn't make any kind of difference in our budget but I've learned long ago not to bother fighting the small fights.

[Hubert Flottz]

1407. My two cents...Now is a bad time to think of anything but beating

back the GOP in November.

Anytime you think I hurt the place, all you have to do is say the word and I'm history.

I won't lie and say I'm happy with the way the democrats have squandered the huge edge they had to set the country on a better path. But I think that if McCain had won we'd really be screwed about now. Probably be invading Iran instead of pulling out of Iraq. No hope of reversing the damage the neocons did. McCain thought Bush did a fine job...

If the republicans gain power the country is toast, IMHO. We all need to stick together for the good of the country.

[NBachers]

1408. I hope this isn't a reflection of how we'll handle the November election

"Staying home on principal" and all that

[shugah]

1409. best wishes Skinner!

as "part of this community" lo! these many years, i hope you can find a way to make it work. (even if i get unincluded.)

[Change has come]

1413. If you feel obligated to continue to censor people and..

Delete posts and ban people, Change your fund drive goal to 500 per quarter. Less people, less expense, Problem solved.

[shireen]

1414. how to respond?

After reading three-quarters of this thread, i'm speechless.

So i'll make a donation in honor of all that's good about DU and use this as an excuse to post a few photos of kittens. :D


(Carson, http://kittenwar.com/kittens/170450/ )


(Tinkerbelle, http://kittenwar.com/kittens/148485/)


(Pinky, http://kittenwar.com/kittens/186136/)

[Janice325]

1452. Thank you, thank you, thank you for the kitty pics!!!!

I've been wading through this thread for the last hour or so...Your kitty pics were a welcome change of pace, and a great stress-reliever. I just cannot resist adorable kitty pics. Awwwww..
(I wish I could give a big ole k&r to your pics).

[shireen]

1457. well ... *somebody* had to stand up and say it!

;)

[madmax]

1416. Oh Ye, of little Faith...

;)

[TransitJohn]

1418. The divide here is between authoritarians and anti-authoritarians.

And from my vantage point it looks like the side leans heavily towards the authoritarian point of view in it's moderation.

[grahamhgreen]

1422. Thank you! Please make all results of all surveys 100% public. nt

[Writer]

1423. Skinner, I hope these thoughts may grant you added perspective on your situation.

Full disclosure: Political communication is a large function of my PhD work.

The issue I see brewing here is what DU means as a part of the public sphere. Before, the idea of an online bulletin board site catering to Democratic perspectives meant to counter the Republican voice that dominated the public sphere since 2001. That is, ONE voice among MANY in a larger public sphere.

Then the ball shifted; Democrats became the dominant voice in the public sphere. Now, I am not going to argue the point of corporate ownership, because I don't agree with 99% of my fellow DU posters that corporate ownership automatically means that our media ALL have a conservative ideological bias. There are no statistics that support this idea, nor is it theoretically possible for that to happen in such a diverse public sphere. It will, however, be a false belief that will carry into perpetuity on BOTH sides of the political aisle. Journalistic malfeasance caused by a money-driven media? Now, that's a reality within many newsrooms. Nonetheless, Democrats are in power, and the Obama administration has the ability to drive the narrative. Whether they're successful depends on many factors. In light of this, DU's purpose within the public sphere has shifted.

I think the mistake you have made is assuming that, by catering to all ideological perspectives within the Democratic party, you're establishing a kind of mini-public sphere in which individuals from points in the Democratic continuum can exchange ideas. Unfortunately, such an idea breaks with the idyllic community you aspire to, and it also assumes a Habermasian ideal in which the public is rational; the truth is, we are NOT rational. I think it's also unrealistic to assume that you can serve as a salient voice within the larger public sphere by doing this. Understand this: Although you serve the public by offering this terrific site, the reality is that this is a site held by private interests - YOUR interests - and it is your job to steer your site's perspective. This means that, yes, you should be selfish! Say what's on your mind! What purpose do you want your site to serve? Yes, you will drive away a group of people, but you will also attract others who agree with your approach. You will be smaller, yes, but those who are on your site will contribute with more ferocity. Your "community" will have identity salience.

If you want an example of this, look no further than the Daily Kos. As you remember, during the 2008 primary, Markos Moulitsas spoke out in support of Barack Obama, offending a swath of Clinton supporters (me included). But despite the controversy, his site maintained its strength and after the primary, it moved on. Although I was disgusted with what Kos did, two years later, I read Kos because he offers a perspective that I may or may not always agree with, but I know what that perspective is.

Bottom line: DU needs an identity. What does being a Democrat mean, according to DU? The fact is, you own the site. Perhaps you should drop your cloak of objectivity and start posting your perspective, but be ready for many folks to get discouraged and leave. I would also suggest that you switch away from the bulletin board format and transition to a blogger format with regular contributors. In that case, you would be able to lessen the chaotic, duplicitous, and superfluous postings that blanket every page view.

But because I am a member of this site, I will offer a reason for why I haven't contributed to this drive. Simply, as a poster, I am overwhelmed by the discordant voices on the site and am upset by its loss of direction. I want to know where you and the other administrators stand on the current status of the Democratic Party and whether this is a site where I can commune with those who are like-minded, or if I should go elsewhere.

Anyway, I don't know if any of my suggestions are of help, but I hope they provide you with an added perspective.

The best of luck to you.

[Safetykitten]

1432. You write like Spock after a shot of whiskey, also...

"Simply, as a poster, I am overwhelmed by the discordant voices on the site and am upset by its loss of direction."

Uh, its' CALLED being a Democrat.

"What does being a Democrat mean, according to DU?" I think he knows this.

[Writer]

1435. And you don't know your head from your ass.

Fuck off.

[Safetykitten]

1440. Well I do know this. It is the proverbial gut check time, for our party and places like this.

Getting all discordant and stuff.

Gays are tired of giving and being promised things. This election cycle there may not be a so many gay people very keen on voting. Places like this may not have that easy-vote block to kick around anymore, especially if we are always put on the defensive. I suggested a truce type agreement that could work upthread, but you may have missed it in your perusal of the discordant masses.

[shireen]

1461. good luck with you PhD defense

with that kind of response to a question/comment, you'll need it.
:rofl:

[Joey Kidd]

1477. Lol !

Yeah,that was a deep reply.Maybe his PhD thesis was about 4 letter words ? :rofl:

[nashville_brook]

1562. oh that's funny!

[John Agar]

1510. This is not very good "writing" is it?

Quite a shift from the tone of the prior post too.

[DevonRex]

1526. Oh look, it's Shirley Temple's husband.

[CBR]

1533. Was he from Pennsylvania? I can't recall

Allentown maybe???

[DevonRex]

1541. I"m sure that's it. Pennsylvania.

:hi:

[Scurrilous]

1707. Heard you turned down lunch with the President.

:rofl:

Aren't you usually drunk by lunch?

[Barack2theFuture]

1564. no knock on Writer, but that was fucking funny!

"Spock after a shot of whiskey" :rofl:

[Catherina]

1463. Excellent post. n/t

[CBR]

1507. Great post Writer...

my dissertation work involves the public sphere as well.

[woo me with science]

1516. "Political communication is a large function of my PhD work."

:rofl:

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose...

[GinaMaria]

1426. In the past I have donated because I felt I was paying for a service

I used. This site no longer offers the type of service I am willing to pay for, and I am seeking other options. You made your decision. DU is a completely different place from the Board I joined years ago. I cannot imagine putting up a DU booth at a liberal event today like some of us did for the Jim Hightower thing years ago. Things change, people change. It happens. I, like many who used to post here, am in search of a Progressive Underground and alignment with those who want to change the direction our country has been moving. This split has been happening for some time now. It may not be a bad thing, just something different. It's more difficult for those who want unity and consensus, but those are not necessary ingredients progress.

I may drop in around election time as I have in the past and if my usage of the site increases, I will make a donation for using the site at that time. For now, my resources are better spent else where. I hope there are no hard feelings. Thanks for some great memories.

Good luck, Skinner.

Peace,
GinaMaria

[deacon]

1427. For me it's the community. If you're a solidarity democrat there's no where to participate here.

The GD has become mayhem and loaded with knee jerk reactionaries looking for any little point to trash Obama, to the point where it appears that some aren't concerned about the truth anymore and deconstructing the issue(s)(after the lastest media injection) at hand ala racheal maddow - they are just concerned about, being right. The poison of getting into a state of mind where the goal is to end up saying "I was right all along."

Contrary to what Skinner said, I don't see anything wrong with creating a seperate area on DU for solidarity democrats at all. The arguement about choosing sides doesn't float with but DU having an appeal for all democrats does makes sense to me.

[LostinVA]

1489. What, pray tell, is a "solidarity Democrat"?

It is a bit icky that you are using union terms for what I think is a DLC/Conservadem POV.

[boston bean]

1491. It means Party over Principle.

Plain and simple.

And that is where the entire problem lies here in DU.

No matter how much the "solidarity democrats" say they believe in the principles, it very hard to wrap your mind around the concept, because in their zeal to promote any democrat (person) they are in essence kicking the principle to the curb.

And then one who is not a "solidarity democrat" gets accused of sowing division. In other words, how dare they say the "solidarity democrat" is working against said principle. Even when the "solidarity democrats" are laying the down the triangulating strategy to win the next election, they want you or me to go along. So, half a loaf is better. Problem is it's not half a loaf. It's not even a slice of bread.

It's a viscious circle.

But I'm sorry, anyone who believes it's ok to use choice or DADT or gay rights, or war as a bargaining chip with the Right, deserves scorn.

[LostinVA]

1498. Yeah, that's what I thought

And, they are using the langiage of Labor to try to marginalize the Left and liberals. Vile.

[MineralMan]

1535. "It's a viscious circle."

I'm confused, here. Did you mean "vicious" or "viscous"? I can see an argument for both words. So, please tell us which one you meant.

[BootinUp]

1543. lol

if the circle was made from a polymer or glassy material it could be a viscous one. Good catch.

[denbot]

1433. Dear Skinner EarlG, and Elad. Message heard and my grateful donation made.

Thanks guys, you/we have something wonderful here.

[Go2Peace]

1437. Skinner - It's not the disagreements. DU is in conflict with it's mission

It's always been a "discussion board", well, on discussion boards people discuss. But things get really cranky when a group of people wants to dominate and tell others what they can and cannot think. That is just completely at odds with discussion.

It is a fairly small group of people that keep the arguments running and post the call out OPs whenever something happens that invigorates a debate here. The situation is (somewhat) controllable.

And it is going to get worse, because the left of the left is (finally) starting to grow, and with all the difficulty people are going to be looking for a place like DU to find people who really want to change the system. And those who don't want to have a discussion about serious change in Washington will have a lot of difficulty with that here..

Personally I think that these discussions are only going to happen more often. Because of two things:

1. The fledgling "Liberal Media" is having an impact on the discussion and it will be growing a small movement
2. Many Democrats thought things would "right" once Bush was out, and people are realizing, regardless which camp of the party, just how deep the issues in our government are. In some ways this administration was a wake up call for many Democrats, because regardless how you feel about current policies, it is now obvious the problems are very deep and societal. That is going to drive more discussion.

[dave29]

1442. This is a plumbing problem

What we have here is a series of tubes that people are using to anonymously say the things they've always wanted to say. Some of us are not anonymous to each other. But most are not truly known to each other here -- and people become targets for pent up and yet wholly legitimate feelings. The internet thrives for this very reason, and this site was unusual in that during the Bush era most folks were fairly "nice" until the primaries rolled along.

I have been here since 2002. I am a strong supporter of this President, his policies, the progressive agenda -- and a strong believer in incremental-ism. We got to this point via a lot of very hard work, so it is disheartening to see the divide and the anger it stirs in folks who would be good pals were they next door neighbors.

But even the best incrementalists, especially those like me with a strong undercurrent of idealism and desire for social justice -- have to recognize that sometimes growth comes with sudden, dramatic change. Sometimes with policy, sometimes in our own lives, sometimes on internet message boards.

You and a few others own this site, and there is nothing stopping ya'll from doing what you want. Honestly, I'd like to sit back and watch a radical change, because I think it would break up the tension a little. This site needs more humor and reasons for us to get to know each other, not just type the same thing at each other every single day. If a change meant I had to go, so be it, but it would be a truly sad day, since this is, as many say, a home.

Back on point: get the worst of the worst from all sides, put them in an actual, rather than virtual room, and the nice will flow out like you've never seen. The trick is making an anonymous site more transparent, but I don't know that it can be done safely. Maybe more fun things like the stickers, but without the fundraisers, or themes that change on the site based on the "mood" of the day. Just throwing random ideas out.

I dunno, I think the most shocking thing to the members of this site would be to actually have to sit next to each other and say the same things we type.

Either that or changing the name of the site to "Democratic Thunderdome". (Insert Tina Turner music here)

[Lindsey]

1453. I've been on DU almost since the beginning. I honestly don't

know what I would have done without this site during those horrific eight years in which we had criminals in charge. I've also been saddened by some of the hatred I've seen since President Obama was sworn in. Since this is a Democratic site, I have to admit that I want to share thoughts with others who support the Democrats. Of course I don't agree with everything every Democrat does. IMO that's a ridiculous notion.

I've been very put off by some of the intense President Obama bashing. I agree with others who have posted that they feel freepers have been involved. I also think that some Greens are here. I'm not a Green and this isn't a Green board. I'm not saying anything against them personally. What I am saying is that folks who are supportive of that platform need to go to a site that is supportive of that agenda.

I am very open to the idea of those in charge putting ideas out there and doing some experimenting. I'd like to see much more civility. I hope that happens. Thank you, Skinner, for addressing the situation. (I just now donated what I could).

[LostinVA]

1494. There is very, very little "Obama Bashing" on DU

And, what little there is, is almost always by obvious low-post-count trolls.

Also, Greens are not only allowed at DU, but also welcome, as per DU's own rules and mission statement. I think maybe the Crist advocates is who you should be talking to, not liberal posters who are supportive of the actual Dem platform.

[BootinUp]

1502. Don't believe our lying eyes

I guess is your wish?

[LostinVA]

1495. There is very, very little "Obama Bashing" on DU

And, what little there is, is almost always by obvious low-post-count trolls.

Also, Greens are not only allowed at DU, but also welcome, as per DU's own rules and mission statement. I think maybe the Crist advocates is who you should be talking to, not liberal posters who are supportive of the actual Dem platform.

[laughingliberal]

1556. I can appreciate what you are saying. However, many Democrats here are accused of being 'Greens.'

I am very often in disagreement with the President's policies. I can see where some of the posts here are over the top. I can also see, however, many times when people who are posting about an issue they have with the President's policies, actions or lack of actions, are met with swarming attacks and these posters are accused of bashing or being Obama 'haters.'

As for Greens being present on the board, it is true we have some here and the rules do allow it. OTOH, there are posters here who accuse anyone who is in disagreement with the President of being a Green. I have even see a post in one forum where the OP stated that the people here who oppose the President are not Democrats and are really Greens. I have seen life long Democrats (myself among them) told to 'go find a Green board' to post on.

I find it inconsistent that we are not allowed to point out when Democrats on this board are pushing the policies of Reagan but those who still believe in the traditional Democratic party platforms can be accused of not being 'real Democrats.'

[smiley_glad_hands]

1449. I hadn't realized there was so much strife here.

After the election, i took a deep breath and exhaled. Sorry, but I support our President and think he's doing a fantastic job, not perfect or ideal, but fantastic.

People on the left need to realize that the repugs have moved the country so far to the right over the past 50 years, it's going to take probably another 50 to move it back.

Our system is not designed to turn on a dime, again sorry. I knew this when i voted for BO and it wouldn't be any different with HC either.

We can either all try to take baby steps forward together, or we can can fight amongst ourselves and let the repugs keep pushing us backwards.

I've read some of that other site, there are alot of former members there that i enjoyed reading even though i didn't always agree with them. I had wondered what had happened to Nance Gregg as well.

Well, hopefully the admins here decide to have reconciliation and some of those peeps can come back, but at the same time I also think Glenn Beck is doing a good enough of a job bashing our president that anyone left of ghengis khan should try to show some support for our president.

Personally, I like the two separate groups idea skinner. Give people a place to vent while at the same time giving those of us who don't want to see mindless bashing of our president some space as well.

Mindless bashing should not make it to the greatest page either. Constructive criticisms only. You need to get rid of the personal attacks as well. Its a tricky job you got here skinner, good luck, and I will be donating this weekend at some point, its late and im tired.

[LostinVA]

1496. Honest question: why is it ALWAYS "People on the Left"n who need to be quiet

And get over it? Why not the Conservadems?

[smiley_glad_hands]

1686. Sorry, I dont understand the context of your question as it relates to my post.

[donheld]

1466. Some of us aren't mad, just flat broke.

[Dover]

1471. Well, perhaps the purpose for this community needs to be redefined now.

Perhaps the DU community can take a leading rather than reactive role in shaping a new landscape,
becoming pro-creative. The areas of DU that get bogged down in the muck are the reactive 'rooms'.
The forums that are focused on sharing information ( everything from cooking to diy to photography) are the strengths of this community now, imo. We all WANT to contribute, educate, share experiences and explore new possibilities.

So rather than a community that reacts to the media/news and focuses often too narrowly on an old political model that is certainly in a state of deterioration toward a more natural diversity that blurs the old lines, what about a community that explores new paradigms and both the necessary deconstruction and construction for getting there. I can imagine a forum that explores energy, issues, one that explores new ways to grow and distribute food, one that explores new types of transportation, new ways to govern, civic planning, etc. ETC. In fact they already exist in some form, but they don't have a unified purpose or direction.
So perhaps these forums would become working groups with a constuctive and meaningful purpose that would include government issues but not exclusively. A more holistic approach.

I know the temptation is to impose greater authority to hold everything together, but maybe your radical actions can be otherwise applied. Besides, the iron fist has never worked for long because you can't hold back the necessity and inevitability of change. But if you can anticipate the direction of change.... That authoritarian solution is so old school and predictable and always requires a scapegoat and greater polarization. Another way to view things is that perhaps chaos and signs of deterioration offer a font of creative energy that simply needs new direction and paradigm shifts. Unused talents can be mined. At least that sounds like much more fun, more challenging and a constructive use of the 'community' which is DU. Come on Skinner (and admins). Me thinks your own talents for creating community and a place for substantive contributions have not nearly been mined as of yet. Don't rely on an existing set of parameters delivered by politics or the media. Where do YOU want to take this community?

[pstokely]

1478. Up to 885 as of this post

nt

[PJPhreak]

1483. Its not You Skinner,or the "Divisions" that are forming here...

At DU,In fact I kinda like my political discussions on the "Racus" side,ya know,Loud,Rowdy,Opinionated mixed with a bit of Bullheaded Stubbornness.

It helps me learn,opens my eyes and yes on occasion slaps me upside the head.

The only reason I have not made a donation is that I have been out of a job for over a year,The Water Heater took a crap three weeks ago,my car has been sitting in the driveway for two months for lack of nothing more than a new battery,my motorcycle sits in the yard under a cover cuz I aint got the 80 bucks to pay the insurance and the only income I have is the $200 worth of food stamps I get each month.

If It were not for My Girlfriends SSI Check and the help of my FIL we would be living out of a Van down by the River. Really we Would.

There is no employment here in these little valleys that make up the Flint Hills of Ks.Nothing at All.When the largest town in the county has a bit less than two thousand people employment prospects get bleak...Fast

And that is the only thing that has been stopping me...The simple lack'o bucks.


And I am sure that I am not the only one hurtin here,quite sure in fact.

[XanaDUer]

1490. Then," have amnesty for banned DUers

and a large, unmoderated sub-forum."

This is the best suggestion. People committed to their principles can defend themselves here . Those who disagree can do so with them. No running to the mods or planning stealth banning attacks in groups. Just make a rule that, if someone threatens or stalks another member, that gets them banned.

I am still in contact with several banned DUers, and they *are* liberals, and the *do* support progressive policies, yet they got banned from here b/c certain groups did not agree with some of what they said.

[JTFrog]

1492. Just donated.

Mostly to make a freeper cry.

Money is very tight for most of us. If you do hit the goal, and it looks like you will, I hope you rethink those radical experiments.

[glowing]

1497. I honestly think it has more to do with the economy than heavy disputes.

I don't know anyone who isn't feeling a pinch. The small business I work for cannot even make the mortgage this month on the place of business. So, who knows what will happen? And I have a few personal issues going on with my own mortgage and loss of already cut wages; along with a custody battle that has lasted nearly a year.

I find the banter back and forth helpful at times. AND as for President Obama, if he doesn't start leading and doing for all people in this country; he will be a one term president. My brother in law is about to be deployed to Afghanistan. There is no credible reason that anyone feels they should be over there wasting time, money, lives, or resources when America is crumbling. The army didn't even give the normal 5 months heads up. He still doesn't have his deployment assignment. AND old General Petreyus talking about 10 more years isn't being felt too kindly by those who will be on the ground.

[peekaloo]

1508. #900

:bounce:

[John Agar]

1509. Looks like the owners and community have some soul-searching to do.

Some of the responses here are very enlightening.

I had no idea that so much censorship and banning went on here.

Though I as beginning to notice all the deleted messages and "names removed."

What baffles me is why some of the most vicious attacks on individuals are allowed to stay open.

I am not going to donate, and frankly, am going to take a bit of a break to think about this, or until you all get this sorted out.

My advice: Fairness, openness, and honesty are always good policy.

Have a great fall.

[BootinUp]

1523. A moderated forum is um moderated

and the moderators are selected from the community. I think the main criteria is that they have demonstrated an ability to not be hot heads. The rules are clearly stated, although there is some subjectiveness in judging them, hard to do away with that. The fact is it is difficult to moderate this community.

[MineralMan]

1539. Why leave so soon after you got here?

I think you should consider giving DU a little longer trial.

[pipi_k]

1550. My big question is...

Why do the people who are so obviously discontented with DU keep coming back?

Various factions...red dogs, green dogs, yellow dogs, Liberals, Progressives, Kucinich supporters...Obama bashers vs those who think he walks on water...people who love guns vs people who hate them...people who like unrec vs those who don't...people for more moderating vs those who think any form of moderating is a form of "censorship"....


People forget that this is Skinner's "house" to do with as he pleases. And from what I've seen, he tries damned hard to please the largest number of people as he can. Unfortunately, for some, that's not good enough.

"Do it MY way", we hear, "or else I won't donate".


This isn't the first site I've been a member of where a considerable number of individuals have tried to remake the site into their own idea of what they think it should be. And when that didn't happen, they got all pissy and refused to donate also. My reply to that was, "Fine. Go start up your own site with your own rules. Or no rules at all. Go for it, and good luck".

I think Skinner and the rest of the Admins do a great job trying to accommodate the largest number of Democratic-minded people as possible, with the least number of rules possible while still providing a civilized place for discussion. It's just too bad that people can't understand that and realize that, as important as their own views are to them, there are also others involved who realize that no place can be perfect.

[BootinUp]

1566. good post. nt

[Renew Deal]

1595. There's not that much "censorship" and banning

People have been here for many years and some have long memories. You're going to have lots of problems when you have 150K members. The only types of stuff that gets "censored" is vulgar personal attacks or over the top BS.

[scarletlib]

1518. I Love DU

DU is my go to place for the latest in news and commentary and all from a liberal point of view. Mostly I read and comment very little. I do contribute at least one to two times a year.

I read all points of view and learn from them all. We are all Democrats here. Our view points on a particular person or idea may be different but I hope and believe we all want a better, more just country and economy for all of us.

[Adsos Letter]

1521. I just made my yearly renewal to SPLC, ACLU, and AU...

so I'm tapped out this month.

[datasuspect]

1522. i think the problem is that more and more people are starting to realize that the

two mainstream political parties in this country represent polar extremes on a continuum of conservatism.

mainstream democrats represent an eisenhower era republican party and the republicans represent the diseased dream of ultra right wing bircher klansmen flat earth batshit crazy religious lunatic thugs.

there is no room for the left in this country. the noise machine cannot allow reason to interfere in the political process of this country.

it's a soap opera of right wing reaction and hate mongering on the republican side and the earnest efforts of democrats who seek to not look bad in the eyes of these lunatics while pursuing reagonomics lite more than 30 years after it was discredited.

so it's a race to the bottom: let's not even mention that the wealthiest people who actually possess ALL the power in the country want it this way. they want us stupid, hateful, and afraid.

[BootinUp]

1525. Not really

the pragmatists in the party/membership here, are not blind to history or to the power of the corporations and the wealthy. And some of us actually enjoy discussing issues with those that are more activist oriented with less of the pragmatic side. But if there is open warfare in the forum there are not discussions really anyways, just fighting, and there are many who will not participate in that atmosphere. Politics is a touchy subject, leads to disagreements, fine, what we don't need is shouting matches all the time.

[truedelphi]

1613. + My household. n/t

[whistler162]

1524. I will donate after the drive is over....

why, because I don't like the concept of the "donation" counter. The same reason I haven't donated during the proscribed donation periods.

[Orrex]

1528. In college I dated a woman who was really good at gelato

Even way back then, she decried the dissolution of the party into warring camps of sycophants and honest critics. But it's more than that, nowadays: the insulated "bullet proof" cadre of posters who can make any accusation or break any rule with impunity. One poster (of many similar examples) was TSed only after a years-long run of aggressive, hateful attacks. Other posters are TSed for no good reason and are rendered so radioactive that surviving DUers are forbidden even to mention their name.


Everyone who has reason to second-guess his or her donation has seen, among other things, the uneven application of DU rules. This is a fact, and many upthread have already named names.

[MoonRiver]

1530. I know this is going to sound weird,

but my whole problem with DU now is the UnRec feature. It's the reason I'm on Facebook most of the time and not here. I did contribute this time because I still read posts and post here occasionally, but my overall contributions this year have been much less than in previous years. My reason is the UnRec feature, NOT the economy.

[OwnedByFerrets]

1536. K & R for honesty

[Festivito]

1544. DU in B&W discusses

DU in Black & White discusses less and less with more and more binary thinking.

BINARY ACTIONS OF DU:
Banned or not banned.
Deleted or not deleted.
Moved to be unrecommendable or not so moved.

Humans are not binary branch thinkers.

Try color.

Or, drop my ideas again. I do think differently.

[Onlooker]

1547. What I wish most at DU

I don't think I'm alone in wishing that when we share our ideas, we get the sense that someone with some connections is listening. Often it feels that good posts simply collect recommendations and die, and there's no one to say, "That's an idea I'll pass on" or "That's a good idea but here's why we haven't done it." To have a known scholar, pundit, politician, strategist, and so on consider the best ideas would make DU into more than just a cathartic experience or hangout. Perhaps each contributor could get 10 votes a month to use on best threads that would then be forwarded to someone prominent who would post feedback. Right now, the forum is fun, but it doesn't seem to effect change. And if something like that could be made to happen, I think more people would try to post good stuff.

Now I'll donate.

[MellowDem]

1554. Let's be clear about the issue...

Is it possible to have a discussion forum with opposing viewpoints?

DU's answer has always been a resounding NO. When DU was first created, that was the idea. The rationale for not allowing conservative viewpoints was just that. And at first, the Democrats were united behind their opposition to Bush, so heated discussions among Democrats were few and far between to be found on DU.

I have been here since 2001, when I was a conservative in fact and liked to see the other side's viewpoints (I didn't troll or even join, since I knew I'd be kicked). I hated this, just as a hated Free Republic, because it didn't seem to be much of a "discussion" forum as much as a forum of yes men reinforcing each other's views. And it was. Sure, even at that time there were a huge slew of different opinions among the Democrats here, but the opposition to Bush drowned out any and all real internal acrimony. Indeed, it wasn't even the policies as so much the personalities of the right that really rallied Democrats of all stripes.

People are always saying how they loved the good ol days of DU. But the good ol days were the days when DU was an echo chamber, a place where everyone was indeed lockstep. The primary purpose of DU was a place of sanctuary, NOT a place for any sort of serious political discussion or disagreement of any kind. These are the good ol days people remember. This is how the site started out when it was created.

The only real exceptions were the primaries, and those got real nasty, even during the time of Republican reign. And it was a preview of things to come. This last one was the nastiest primary I have ever seen and will likely see for a while yet. DU reflected this reality. How could it not? The reality is that Democrats are a HUGE tent with a ton of different viewpoints.

A lot of people, usually the ones that complain how DU has become nastier and wish for the good ol days, don't understand that what they want is sanctuary and NOT discussion. Even now, with the opposing "sides" you see it. People want a place their "group" can go for sanctuary. Sanctuary is the priority. Discussion is deemed nasty and contrary to what DU is about, because it fundamentally is.

If DU's admins are still of the opinion that opposing viewpoints are impossible to discuss in a reasonable manner on an internet board, which has been their rationale since the very beginning, then they should just pick a side and be what they started out as. A sanctuary and an echo chamber. It is why it has been so hard for them to make the transition towards a discussion forum. That and perhaps the naive belief that disagreements between Democrats alone would be much easier to moderate than disagreements between Democrats and Republicans.

Personally, I have always come to DU for dicussion. Sure, there are quite a few people (on both "sides") who are here not for dicussion, and you can tell, but there are many others capable of handling it. I have enjoyed my discussions here and gotten far more from them than from any sense of sanctuary or a feeling of having my views reinforced by like-minded individuals. Discussions can be rancrous, emotional, heated, even sometimes downright nasty. But damn, they ARE politics. They are necessary to participate in a democracy. Discussions should be moderated, and they are, but it's OK, to a degree, to have heated arguments.

It's HARD to moderate an internet message board with many opposing viewpoints. As Skinner pointed out, the EASY thing to do would be to make DU the way it was originally created to be, one side only, no real discussion, just an echo chamber and sanctuary. Hell, DU already as a matter of policy limits discussion to among Democrats only, and even then it is a hard thing to run.

Since discussion has started popping up more and more on DU as the Democrats gained power, DU has been leaning towards shutting down discussion. It took them a while to see what was happening, but you can tell. In the choice of moderators, the application of the rules, etc, one side has been favored over the other. But that is what DU was always all about. If you like that, if you like a place where a very narrow viewpoint is allowed, where there is always a general sense of paranoia because of this, with trolls around every corner and people tombstoned every other day and new posters are viewed as dead men walking, well then that is the DU you want.

I'm not sure what the "radical changes" are that might be in store for us, but it sounds ominous enough to me, in terms of shutting down opposition and discussion. But maybe it means trying something as radical as allowing and even encouraging opposing viewpoints to discuss things. That is truly radical.

DU has always had a pretense of encouraging discussion while also being a place of sanctuary. It can't be both. It has mostly been a sanctuary, with discussion begrudgingly allowed whe Democrats got into power but not really liked. This weird middle ground has created a lot of confusion, not to mention contradictory ideals to be reached and a lack of predictability of what to expect.

So the question really is, do you want DU to be a place of discussion? Do you want to allow opposing viewpoints even just among Democrats? Or not?

[BootinUp]

1557. Yes to discussion

as you say yourself, you have had them here, so when you say it is not a place for that I am a little confused. I am not for radical changes, I am for a moderated forum that provides some sanctuary from trolls and spammers.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

1555. Looking at these posts (obviously I can't get through them all), it is disheartening to see

that the snark brigade is still operating with impunity. Yes, a banned poster who returned had his posts removed, fine, but the hit-and-run junior high school clique, evidently channeling Operationmindcrime, is still attacking some serious posters who have given carefully thought out, carefully written opinions.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1563. Simple Solution to 70% of the Problem

State that Barack Obama has the same standing as Ben Nelson and Dennis Kucinich——a Democratic elected official about whom opinions differ.

Period.

No animals are more equal than others.


Does that mean people have to be nicer to Ben Nelson and Dennis Kucinich or people can be less nice to Obama?

Your call.

But Obama is just a man like any other.

[LiberalAndProud]

1590. The only posts I've ever had deleted on DU were critical of Ben.

He too, has been a protected Dem on this board. Much as I hate him, I understand. He may be a bastid, but he's our bastid. i guess.

[yurbud]

1635. I like that. If someone here is nice to Ben Nelson, I'd be curious to hear their arguments

for doing so.

[merh]

1577. All I ask is that you not bring back the disruptors who were banned

but who were also some of your big donors. (Buying your protection with their stars and bucks.)

DU is going through the same down turn that the rest of society is going through - the economy sucks, people are frustrated and scared - it shows in their posts and in how much they can give.

The party is splintered, this community reflects that.

Please don't let your fatigue and frustrations allow you to bring back folks that really were not doing much to contribute to the community but who thought they deserved a membership and protection because they donated money.

[lamp_shade]

1632. You read my mind.

[ismnotwasm]

1580. Actually

And I can speak as someone who keeps their head down mostly, you've done a very good job. I often find myself going further and further away, I dislike some of what's been going on, but I always come back. DU is a habit, and there are places here I can go to stay out of the fire as I usually choose to do.



I still get great information here, whether I like that information or not. I still can listen to the relatively and unfortunately small voices, such as the ones that point to the suffering people in Pakistan and say 'here's how you help' I can still get into some sort of internet free-for-all if it's a topic I'm passionate about, and feel smugly righteous once I close the window and get back to my real world. I take a little DU with me, there, my real world, I bring up topics in conversation and use methods of argument and I'm able to back arguments up with facts. You can post a whole lot of things on DU truth, bullshit, or something in-between and perhaps a whole lot of people will believe your own personal vision, but most times, you can't do it without being called on it, sooner or later. Hell, I even get grammar lessons here from time to time.


I was wondering what this drive would be like, it looks better today.

[chill_wind]

1589. A few posters' commentary here really stand out

and pretty well say it all for me- especially Sapphocrat's, Prism's and Hell Hath No Fury's.

It's been gut-wrenching to see the transition from what was once a much larger issues and principles-based community to what has evolved since at the insistence of what I still think of as a minority of very vocal (but apparently also rather influential) snark patrolling bullies. If we were united against George W Bush, it was because he in fact sucked bilge water on the issues. Talking about issues and policies has become much more difficult and volatile on this board since. A chill wind began blowing through this board on honest discourse on Barack Obama, the President and the policies, on Inauguration Day and hasn't abated since.

Sure, the ugliness hasn't been purely one-sided. But in the steady trade-off to appease the emotional personality-driven types, you've lost a whole large cadre of very good, very thoughtful and smart, passionate issues-driven posters since Inauguration Day, Skinner. You know you have. Not all of them were TS'd by far. Most have just in fact left of weariness and an increasing sense of being distinctly unwelcome. The posters above I just mentioned get to the reasons for that very well, IMHO. Whatever direction you decide, I still hope you and others won't skim but will read-- really read- what they said. There's no mystery here at all. Just decisions to be made.

I genuinely wish you well with those decisions. DU was home to me since 2004 until this summer finally, when I pretty much couldn't keep watching any longer the purging and exodus of people whose POV's I shared so much with, regardless of what final discussion board sin they committed. I'm grateful for those many good years.

[LostinVA]

1597. +1

[Barack2theFuture]

1593. gee, take a couple of days off and the whole thing goes goofy...

First, I hope this thread is not just a phishing expedition looking for liberals to tombstone. (Sadly, that had to be said.)

Second, DU currently suffers from three interrelated problems as I see it.

1. POLITICAL CONTEXT. The Democratic Party in DC is neither liberal nor progressive. That is objective reality. It is in power and seeking to retain power. Right, left, principle . . . all are irrelevant, or at best secondary to retaining power. Given the utter corruption of our government, the goal of power is not compatible with even moderately progressive ideals. It also is increasingly incompatible with even the party's own platform. Make no mistake. There is a dangerous and widening schism between the Democratic base and the Democratic Party. That dynamic is playing out right here at DU. The more liberal the Democrat, the wider the schism. DU suffers because some users are intolerant "D" extremists and others are intolerant "U" extremists. This leaves those of us who long for both--the "DU"--attacked and driven away, almost exclusively by the "D" team. Your attempts at compromise in redefining the mission and the rules have moved the site steadily to the right, exactly mirroring what the party has done during its return to power. Progressive Democrats are tired of being given the finger by the party, and they sure won’t put up with it from a website, when there are other more progressive options.

2. DU MISSION. DU is your site, so solving this is 100% up to you, Skinner. You sound truly exhausted. Perhaps some sort of a retreat for you and the other admins would help. It seems to me, even as a newbie, that the daily reality of the site has become largely disconnected from its mission statement. As a result, the mission has become hollowed out--empty words that have been parsed and clarified and used for abusive purposes to the point that they have a negative effect if any at all. As “CEO,” you must feel this personally. I see tactical decisions about site moderation, locking threads, deleting posts, banning users, etc. overshadowing the strategic direction of DU. The tail is wagging the dog, which is exhausting for both the tail and Fido. If I may be so bold, I suggest that you should start fresh with first principles. First, try to relax and center yourself within your own life. Who are you? What do you want the site to be? What is your vision? Do you want peace or discussion? This is the Internet; the two are not compatible. What population of users do you want? In turn, what will they want in terms of discussion, freedom, and rules? Develop a new mission accordingly, and plan the future of the site based on this vision. You sense a need for change? Don’t make the Obama mistake. Make that change REAL and meaningful. Rhetoric will not satisfy anyone, least of all you.

3. TACTICAL MANAGEMENT, MODERATION AND "RULES". Even as a relative newbie, it is obvious to me that the enforcement of "rules" here is inconsistent and inequitable to say the least. As a result, the inevitable perception is that rules are applied capriciously, grotesquely unfairly, and punitively against a certain segment of posters. Progressive posters are routinely disappeared like El Salvadoran union organizers. Meanwhile, rabid lynch mobs roam the forums, targeting and eliminating posters they disagree with and disrupting threads at will. This very thread is a laughably ironic example of exactly that. There are 20 - 30 users here who, as far as I can tell, have never made a constructive contribution to a discussion, but serve merely to invade threads they do not like, gang up on posters they do not like, and seek to eliminate them. In effect, they are hit squads, and they represent one narrow, doctrinaire point of view. They are demagogues and bullies. If you do not see this as a problem central to the issues you raise in this thread, there is nothing any of us can say that will help. Until users perceive a basic sense of fairness in the application of the rules, don't expect much support or participation from those who are attacked just for supporting Democratic ideals.

[Laelth]

1681. +1 Well said. n/t

-Laelth

[steve2470]

1596. There is another site called "Progressive Underground"

http://factbased.proboards.com/index.cgi

Perhaps DU could buy up that domain name. Just a thought.

[BeachBaby]

1599. Moderator bias is largely what turned me off.

That, and particular members' paranoia in thinking that other members' posts are "veiled call-outs". You know it's bad when you can't mention the name Wilford Brimley.

Some people seem to be able to get away with saying anything they want - without repercussions - while others get the ban hammer for a whole lot less.

[RetroLounge]

1713. +7

:applause:

RL

[yurbud]

1603. too many progressive posts are locked for being ''divisive'' (ie, accurate about DLC)

[LWolf]

1604. Some thoughts:

First of all, you should know that my decrease in the amount I donate is directly related to changes in my financial status. For me, that downturn began in 2005, with some family crises, and has been made dire by the subsequent collapse of the economy. I don't find DU to be as friendly or welcoming as I did in the past, but that's not the reason why I'm not donating more. I donate what I can, based on what's in the bank, once a year.

Secondly, I KNOW that you don't much appreciate my contributions. That's why I can't even post a sig-line anymore. We've talked about it. Sort of. What is to the point is that the very situation that brought about the removal of that privilege is the same as what divides DU today. I dared to point out the divide in 2008.

We are divided. It is a deep divide. And I saw it coming. While I think your "center of gravity" metaphor works, I think there is another issue at the core of the divide. One you built into the site, and have not wanted, to my knowledge, to acknowledge:

The identity of DU as a "left-wing" message board and a partisan board. The Democratic Party is not "left wing." It is inevitable that there will be conflict between partisans whose goals are to advance the interests of the Democratic Party, regardless of ideology, and actual "left wing" people, whose goal is to advance left-wing positions on issues.

As site owners, you've made sure that, when push comes to shove, party will trump issue. But still, there's the "left-wing message board." The left is still allowed, as long as we are careful not to use the site to campaign for the downfall of a Democrat. Except, perhaps, for this November's Senate race in Florida.

"Left-wing" and "Democrat" can be broadly or narrowly defined. It has seemed to me that "left-wing" is narrowly defined to mean "left wing of the Democratic Party," which is not very "left-wing," and "Democrat" as been defined as anyone registered with the Democratic Party, whether or not their words or actions fit the party platform. A much broader definition.

The Democratic Party, and therefore DU, is in the midst of a Civil War (and mostly not so civil) to determine the identity of the party. Who, and whose values, does the party represent? Is it the "old" Democrats, who include labor, education, the poor, the disenfranchised, as an important part of the base, or is it the "new" Democrats, who are economic neoliberals, who downplay the contributions and values of those who have gone before, whose ideology bears more resemblance to Republicans of a few decades ago than Democrats? For some of us, it seems that this administration, and the party, are burning bridges to "old" Democratic blocks as fast as they can. It's not about "pragmatic, sensible" liberals vs idealists. It's about the evolution of the party into something new, and very different, from what it has been, and about what direction it will evolve.

Is there room for both?

I don't have the answers. I don't know what kinds of ideas you've got. Some changes have been, imo, counter-productive. The Rec/Unrec situation, for example, where unrecs (and sometimes recs) are used by organized groups as a guerrilla warfare tactic. I think it's led to furthering the divide, and making respectful discussion and disagreement more difficult.

As the Democratic Party goes, so will DU. Because, as we are constantly reminded, it's DEMOCRATIC Underground.

How will DU evolve? As a forum for policy issues, or a wing of the party's message police? Or something else? As site owners, you will determine the direction the site is allowed to grow. While I completely understand your reluctance to take sides, I'm racking my brain to try to remember some Civil Wars where no side, or all sides, "won." There may be some, but they aren't coming to mind this morning. If you don't take a side, I think the battles will get uglier, and bloodier, until one side gives up and goes elsewhere. If you do, the result will be the same. I think it's time for the site to evolve, and as owners, it's up to you to choose the direction.

I'll be here until you decide you don't want me.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

1605. "Unless we experience some kind of miraculous and unprecedented turn-around..."

So much for that. Back to work, everyone.

:patriot:

[City of Mills]

1607. You need to find a way to make early donations 'sexier'

Maybe 2 stickies for the first 500 donations, or a 'buy one, give one free' promo :)

[NYC_SKP]

1608. Skinner: We did it. Now we need to match this success on the streets and at the polls in November.

The media is predicting losses for our team, may their forecasting skills be as 'inaccurate' as your own.

Cheers!

NYC_SKP

[demmiblue]

1616. Somehow, I do not think that this was the primary purpose of Skinner's post....

but maybe it was.

:shrug:

[kgnu_fan]

1612. Came to DU to fight against the war and war is a crime. We must stop it

[yurbud]

1615. I did a poll here a few years ago on ''What kind of Democrat are you?'' here's results

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5567638&mesg_id=5567638


86% at that time were progressive Democrats or further left.

Moderate Democrats, DLC, & those further right were about 13%.

I suspect that some of those who voted ''moderate,'' were in fact only moderate on gays, abortion, and the like, but were New Deal progressives on economics, trade, etc, which would push the progressive number above 90%.

Right now, the 13%ers are ruling the roost here. They post repetitive empty talking points, insult progressives as whiny and unrealistic, and either as moderators or by hitting alert, they seem to be getting a lot of threads locked that criticize the corporate wing of the Democratic Party, or actions of Obama that sell out progressives in favor of corporate control of government.

If Democratic Underground wants to become the home of the 13%ers and lose the 86% or more who are progressive, then let things continue as they are now.

Probably the most destructive current trend on DU is locking threads as ''divisive'' because they criticize Obama or Congress's actions that betray progressive values. The reality is the right wing of the party is not only the source of the divisiveness but they are behaving UNdemocratically by ignoring the will of the majority of those who voted for them.

If we cannot discuss honestly the betrayal of the base by our elected officials, we cannot influence the party at all. We can simply vote at elections then cheerlead Democrats for being slightly less callous than the GOP toward the middle class as they serve the rich. That will lead to a smaller and smaller difference between the parties on issues crucial to most of our economic survival.

At the same time, I would not want to ban the DLC & Blue Dogs from this board. I welcome their comments when they have actual arguments and evidence in favor of their policies, and respond to questions with more of the same. The one repetitive post from them I don't mind is the list of Obama's legislative and other accomplishments as president because it is substantive. Unfortunately, too few from that faction are willing to do that. They either start with or fall back on a very short list of talking points/insults:

1. progressives are unrealistic and whiny, and
   
   
2. Obama & Congress did what they have the votes to do

The latter was made even when the Democrats had a supermajority in the Senate, enough to over-ride any filibuster.

If asked to defend that vote based argument, they will claim that since Blue Dogs & DLCers come from more conservative states, they have to vote like Republicans to hold onto their seats.

However, on many issues, from the public option to financial reform to the deficit commission that will recommend cuts in Social Security and raising the retirement age, that is a lie. Not only are the right wing Democrats voting against the will of Democrats nationally, they are voting against the majority of their party's voters and even independents in their own states. That is not out of necessity or ideology, but simple, venal corruption. They write the bills to suit their campaign donors who give them money now and will give them jobs as lobbyists, CEO's, and corporate board members when they leave office. Someone who ignores that or pretends it isn't true is ignoring something as axiomatic and obvious as gravity or the sun rising in the East and setting in the West.

As Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, ''Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.''

Democraticunderground.com has to make a choice: either we will be the Progressive Democratic Underground or the DLC Chamber of Comment and Sacred Talking Points.

If the site owners choose the latter, there will be few left here to discuss and they will quickly be bored.

[kgnu_fan]

1618. I agree with your analysis. Accurate description of what has been going on.

[MissDeeds]

1619. Wish I could K&R this post

I think you have captured the frustration many of us are feeling, and why so many former posters have left. The 13% who are moderates are ruling the roost. They are extremely vocal and shout down any rational, reasoned criticism of this administration. They accuse posters of being trolls, Repubs, or any other vile thing they can think of. I firmly believe that the party is bigger than any one person - even if that person is the president. Many here have spent time and money to elect the candidates of their choosing and have a right to question or criticize any candidate who they feel has misrepresented him/herself or is not following through on campaign promises.

Being shouted down by a minority 'swarm' does not serve the best interests of the party or this board.

[kgnu_fan]

1621. I just do it... kick

[yurbud]

1625. I posted this as a new thread and it was locked within minutes

which is an ironic symptom of the problem.

[MissDeeds]

1711. This was locked?

Yeah, looks like mission accomplished. That does underscore everything you said.

[Radical Activist]

1624. When you referred to DU being run by the "13%" crowd

I thought you were referring to polls that show around 13% of liberals aren't happy with the job Obama is doing. I don't know how to reconcile your idea of who dominates DU when I see GD and GDP filled with threads attacking Obama, often innacurately. I frequently get PM's from people thanking me for my comments that rebut dishonest hyperbole against Obama. They stopped doing it themselves because of those who gang up on anyone making positive comments about Obama. Often those attacks are personal, such as the smear campaign conducted against me simply because I made Obama-haters feel stupid once too often.

This comment and the responses to it say it all.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8871218&mesg_id=8871418

[yurbud]

1626. you and I probably agree on something: that thread shouldn't have been locked

[yurbud]

1697. the question not asked in polls of the general public and Democrats in particular

is whether you are satisfied or not, have Obama's policies been too corporate influenced, too progressive, or about right?

A lot of people are going to say they are satisfied because he is not an imbecile like Bush (kind of the mirror opposite of the conservatives who hate Obama because he's black).

[flyarm]

1641. Excellent post!!! May I add , besides the "talking points" people posting the points, they twist

and re-write others posts and words with their own deceptive interpretation deliberately , and they get away with it on a daily basis, in many many threads..it is a deliberate tactic, and it is nefarious ..at best. And some of these people target others and follow them around boards doing everything in their power to get the other poster banned, and tossed.

This behavior is dispicable.

I have had my words twisted and turned over and over again..and it is done deliberately by a certain faction (DLC?)of people here at DU.

I have been followed numerous times by a specific poster..and when it occurs, I leave DU for a certain amount of time..no one should be harassed like this,and it is most definitely harasssment, and yet the harasser's get a free pass every time! In fact it seems at times that that tactic is approved and encouraged, as nothing is ever done to the harasser's.
It is for that reason I am withholding donating until I see if this harassment is curbed.

If it is not, and this behavior is continuely allowed, I will leave here permanently, as I know many many of my friends, and great Democrats have.

If you don't want Liberals here..at least be upfront and tell us..have the guts to admit it. I would take my money and my time elsewhere..where liberals are appreciated, and respected.

[LoZoccolo]

1660. I am one of the more DLC-sympathetic members, and I probably have the most locked threads ever.

I don't think there's any moderator bias. There's only one instance where a thread of mine was locked and it was a case where they clearly laid down a distinct boundary that I did not cross (it was a time period and I posted within the time period), but that's it. I own the consequences of the rest, and I really have found that if you keep civil and mature, you can express a pretty wide-range of viewpoints here. I've even seen people advocate very far-left communist positions without breaking the rules, and they've stood.

[yurbud]

1695. I think the crux of it is how they deal with intra-Democratic Party conflict

You can express DLC views, progressive views, or even further left views and not get locked.

But if you directly address conflict between DLCers and progressives, you will.

I don't think that is helpful for the party.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1715. ...

[LoZoccolo]

1720. Now I'm curious!

If it was a personal attack, I generally don't alert those if they're against me as long as they don't accuse me of being a right-winger or a paid poster. I can't keep other people from alerting and can't absolutely promise, but you might have noticed that I let of personal attacks go.

[Catherina]

1670. Thank you. Recommended. Every single word of your post. n/t

[Laelth]

1717. k&r for the truth.

As I have said before, DU is (or was) the premier liberal American political website. Telling us we can not attack conservative Democrats will mean the death of this forum.

-Laelth

[Spheric]

1718. +1

[depakid]

1743. +!

[stranger81]

1756. This deserves its own OP -- one that stays unlocked. [n/t]

*edited after reading upthread, to my dismay, that yurbud's post of his reply as an OP was locked*

[yurbud]

1628. my guess is that locking threads as ''divisive'' pisses off both sides

there are real differences between our two factions and not acknowledging and discussing them honestly is like a family with an alcoholic or drug addicted member but everyone in the family insists that everything is fine.

(and the point of my analogy is not to say one faction is the addict but simply the part about ignoring an issue).

[Radical Activist]

1630. There are two areas of division on this site and it isn't left/center.

Division one is political with three groups.
1) People who will defend Obama at all times.
2) People who criticize Obama on specific issues when they believe he deserves it.
3) A smaller group who actively campaign against Obama, frequently attacking him fairly or unfairly no matter what he does (these may be left or right).

Division two is non-political, although it's a tactic that right-wing trolls are known to use as a method of destroying public forums.
A) People who stick to issues.
B) People who frequently instigate personal attacks and/or engage in cyber-stalking/bullying behavior.

Groups B and 3 are destroying DU, they often overlap, and the response to it has been weak.

[kgnu_fan]

1642. cyber-stalking/bullying behavior is what is most destructive around here

those few people are very distinctive in their behavior and their presence alone makes productive discussions impossible. Whenever they show up in a thread, I just leave...

[MissDeeds]

1645. I understand how you feel

and often do the same - but if we leave when they show up (and take over a thread as they often do) they have succeeded in shouting us down.
I guess that's the plan. But, if this very vocal minority wins, Dems lose. Simple math. Any political party needs a majority to get candidates elected.

[flyarm]

1654. +1 million!

[kgnu_fan]

1657. I agree with you. But they stink bad....

[flyarm]

1655. these bullies think they are the only ones with rights here at DU, and they are destroying this

community, and they are being allowed to. Its a damn shame.

This used to be the #1 place on the internet I would go to..now it is my last choice!

All because of a small minority who think they run and own DU ! And they seem to get full immunity from their behavior and rule breaking. The impression they give out is that only their opinions and bullying count!

[Radical Activist]

1666. Absolutely.

This site has a real problem dealing with those few personalities. It's very easy to say "just put that person on ignore" but someone with a stalker mentality will pick more than target and take it beyond posting on this board. Your exactly right that it makes reasonable discussion for the rest of us nearly impossible.

[laughingliberal]

1667. I would add that the B1's aren't helping the the site much, either.

And the response to them is decidedly weak. That group often seems immune to the rules. nt

[kgnu_fan]

1675. If we truly practice democracy, President is our employee, not a ruler.

We need to strengthen our demand for him, telling him what needs to be done in this country and have to tell HIM what to do, instead of just adoring him. We have serious businesses waiting to be done and we need to demand and pressure him to do them. That is a way to support him, instead of leaving him in a vacuum where he is surrounded by sharks and snitches. He is OUR President. Don't lose him!

[Radical Activist]

1676. I didn't think it needed to be added

that group B is a problem in no matter what their views. It's obvious.
You're wrong to suggest that people who engage in that behavior are getting away with it because they support Obama. My experience has been with the stalker mentality from people who campaign against Obama. The problem is that the behavior is not being adequately addressed, regardless of the persons particular viewpoint.
In fact the people who engage in that behavior often justify themselves by clinging to a sense that they have been wronged and are being treated unfairly. A sense of victimhood and need to get even can be a driving force. For example, a poster who frequently engages in ugly personal attacks against others and then repeatedly cries "some are more equal than others!" when the rules are applied to him, as if it justifies his bullying behavior.

[laughingliberal]

1679. "My experience has been with the stalker mentality from people who campaign against Obama."

And my experience has been with being bullied by a group that supports the President no matter what. Not saying everyone who is unfailingly supportive of all things Obama engage in bullying but there certainly are those in that group who do this regularly.

I have seen you mention cyber stalking several times and I know I have friends here who feel they are stalked from thread to thread here. I seem to have the same people showing up in threads to refute whatever I say about an issue but it never occurred to me it was stalking but maybe I am being stalked and should take another look at that. Perhaps I need to take another look at that.

As for crying 'some are more equal than others,' I have believed this to be true for some time based on my observations and this is the first time I have ever said it or even hinted at it.


I took Skinner at his word that he wanted to know what was bothering us and so I said it.

[Radical Activist]

1682. ...

There are people who comment on certain topics or frequently debate issues with particular people without crossing over into personal harassment and cyber-stalking. A poster above suggested training or materials to train mods on how to define and recognize it. That would help.

My other comment about a poster crying some people are more equal than others whenever the rules are enforced on him was not directed at you.

[laughingliberal]

1692. Fair enough.

I'm not sure what can be done to change things here. Perhaps some sort of moderator training or other would be in order. All I know is a lot of people here on all sides of the issues don't feel comfortable or accepted now.

Skinner said, "we have two fairly large groups of people who each seem to believe that they are the rightful heirs to this community, and that the other side doesn't even have a legitimate claim to be here."

I see this and have had people tell me to 'go back to the Greens where you belong.' This is said to me despite the fact that I have been a registered Democrat for 37 years and never voted for anyone but a Democrat. I have seen posts in one forum where people were stating that people who 'bash' President Obama (which seems to be, in their minds, disagreeing with him) are not really Democrats but are really Greens or Socialists. The clear message was, "They don't belong here."

I know people on the other side of the debate feel people are trying to drive them out, too.

I hope something can be done where people feel safe to discuss and have an opinion. We'll see what happens.

[flyarm]

1690. ++++++ 10,000!!!!

[JoseGaspar]

1636. Ban the ConservaDems...

Banning leftists is no big deal. Leftists expect to be banned, fired, shunned, arrested, and gassed. Throw them off DU? Yawn. That is a "dog bites man" story.

On the other hand, if you prick that bubble of pompous self-importance unique to the self-appointed middle-managers of political opinion, they squeal like hedgehogs.

You can even sell tickets and kill two birds with one stone.

[NorthCarolina]

1644. Looks like the post worked quite well. Fundraising goal met BEFORE the Sunday deadline. eom

[terrya]

1646. Yep.

I think that was the point of his post. These problems have been around long before any fund drives.

[seabeyond]

1672. du'ers saying how much we appreciate du for what it is. good and bad. nt

[demmiblue]

1650. Two things I learned due to this thread:

1) A whole lot of people feel the same way I do (it is nice not to feel alone!);

2) I finally figured out what those damn references about trees meant. That was bugging the shite out of me for many months. But, I am still working out a few other references.

:hi:

[kgnu_fan]

1661. ;- )

[Divine Discontent]

1652. welcome to the Democratic Party! lololol

my oh my... aren't we a lot.

I like the ideas about putting forums for those who don't cause major stress, maybe a point system that keeps you from being in the upper level forum if you cause strife, but not enough to get banned. I don't know, but I agree that things haven't been the smoothest around here, and I have posted less and less as the capitulation of our gov't has continued allowing the minority party to water down policy that would help the suffering in this country.

My brother spent SIX HOURS in line to vote, and he has a horrible neurological disorder. He is not happy with the WH, but specifically - the president's advisers.

Good luck, Skinner!

[BootinUp]

1699. You think this site is representative of the party?

You must be joking or deluded.

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

1671. In a nutshell, this is your answer...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8990815

... the moderation on this site sucks. Plain and simple, it resembles a cross between the "editorial guardianship" in force at Faux News and the old days in Moscow at Pravda.

There is little room allowed for open and unfettered debate and challenge. Challenge and debate between those blind sycophants of the now Democratic status quo and its Presidency and those of us that three years ago bought - hook, line, and sinker - the "pitch" and then supported and worked to elect this status quo. We have profound buyer's remorse and have become so overwhelmingly disappointed and pissed beyond belief that this "Presidency" has no balls. No balls whatsoever.

I have lurked since the beginning of this site, joined within the last year, and find myself less and less interested in participating, much less contributing to those sycophants who have, indeed, taken over this place.

Sorry and with regret, it's my opinion that there's very little "democratic" about this underground and there is certainly nothing "underground" about it any longer.

[johnnie]

1673. LOL n/t

[Laelth]

1719. +1 Well said. You speak for many here. n/t

-Laelth

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

1725. Yet another... proving the point:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8994793#8994937

... no opportunity, Skinner, for meaningful and substantive political dialogue - according to the "rules" and those that enforce them here.

It's also interesting to note just how prevalent is the fear of "tombstoning" in these threads and throughout the site. Not healthy; not healthy at all.

[byronius]

1674. I just donated. And I have no suggestions.

If I had a million dollars...

This site serves me as information central. I try to give at least as much as a newspaper subscription would cost me. It deserves more.

I hope it lives forever.

[tavalon]

1685. I see the troops rallied to prove you wrong just to show you how contrary we are

However, please, let's still have that discussion. Try to let us figure out how to make this place less like the primary wars in perpetuity. Thanks.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

1687. I will always love you guys!!! and always feels like coming home....

I;ll be sending my donation next month.
Things have been tight by us for a while now, with the GOP/* economy almost complete and now with 2 college tuitions.....We are all feeling it.

DU has been my sanity for 10 years ...full of the most wonderful peeps one can be happy to meet.

THANK YOU THANK YOU and THANK YOU, SKINNER XOXOXO

[Electric Monk]

1708. Fail, but in a good way.

[dipsydoodle]

1710. All's well that ends well

:smiliewithtounguestickingoutandthumbonnose: :)

[truth2power]

1722. There's a reason I don't have a star (and haven't had one for some time)..

and it has nothing to do with finances. It has to do with a principled decision.

If I thought my honest concerns could be expressed, it would be different.

[Violet_Crumble]

1726. The only reason I have one is someone donated one last fund drive...

I'd let mine expire and despite doing well financially, have no intention of donating to DU. I'm not unrealistic in my expectations, but there's problems in the I/P forum. I'm someone who's posted there since 2002 and I've never seen it so bad before. There's a real problem and Skinner isn't interested in doing anything about it and so I'm not interested in donating. When Skinner decides that bigotry against Muslims and Arabs is going to be treated as seriously as bigotry against other groups, then I'll reconsider...

[tallahasseedem]

1727. Drama much?

:eyes:

[Violet_Crumble]

1728. No drama at all and I'm not sure who you are or why you seem to have an issue..

I'm saying why I don't donate. You appear to have a problem with me saying why I don't donate. Not sure what the problem is since I don't recall ever spotting you at DU or ever having any exchanges with you, so there ya go. If you want to call bullshit on anything I said, go for yr life, but I can show anyone who's interested by PM things that back up what I'm saying...

[truth2power]

1747. I hear you! That's one of the major problems for me. Not that I ever go

to the I/P forum. I don't go to the 9/11 forum anymore, either. IMO it's infested with trolls and disinformation artists, and anything you say that doesn't jibe with the "official conspiracy theory" is responded to with "Prove it".

Well, here's my response to that: Where you "prove" things is in a COURT OF LAW. Would that the people of this country could avail themselves of such in regard to 9/11. Bring it on! Not in my lifetime, apparently.

As to I/P issues, I couldn't have said it better than what you've stated above. The way Muslims and Arabs are treated breaks my heart. Moreso because, as you can tell from my statement above, I have determined in every fiber of my being that Arabs are not responsible for 9/11 anyway. Patsies? Perhaps. But 9/11 was a false flag, Cheney, Rummy et. al operation from beginning to end. It worked exactly as promised. It provided a new enemy to distract Americans while the real criminals took away our rights and looted our country.

I am an old person. One benefit of age is that you actually REMEMBER. I can remember when the Commies were going to get us during the 1950's. plus ca change .

That's why it galls me to see anything that isn't totally PC thrown into a dungeon somewhere.

Skinner is young. In years to come, the benefit of age may cause him to see things differently.

[cry baby]

1723. What you're writing about...that's the reason I pretty much only lurk anymore.

Glad you understand. Thank you for caring enough to express yourself here. It's a tough problem, to be sure. I wish you all the luck in the world - I'd like to come back here more than I do and feel Like I can post without being gnawed on.

I used to love DU being my "home".

[book_worm]

1724. They should put you on the Jerry Lewis Telethon, Skinner. Your post saved the day and you got

your 1000 pledges. Congratulations.

[Generic Brad]

1731. Perhaps we need new forums accessible to all

What if???

We could have safe places if we had publicly accessible forums reserved specifically for Liberal Democrats, Conservative Democrats, Progressive Democrats. And if someone gets out of hand in one of those three forums, they would be banned only from the one specific forum as opposed to the entire site.

Or possibly a change in the tombstone policy could be considered. Instead of banning someone from the entire site, perhaps they should only be banned from specific forums after a 30 day cooling off period.

Or when someone has crossed the line, we still allow them to maintain their account and PM people.

I confess, I don't feel this is a safe place to state my views any longer. And I am certain that many people who typically disagree with me feel the same way.

DU can never go back to what it once was, but that does not mean we cannot evolve.

[Marr]

1739. edit

deleted

[Marr]

1745. I think your disagnosis was off.

Personally, I didn't donate because I've noticed a bias in moderation on this site over the last year or two. But you got your donations, so perhaps my point of view is not the norm.

[TBF]

1746. Unrec button -

has done nothing but promote animosity. It is used as a tool of additional censorship by some organized folks with an agenda. I'd get rid of that as a first step towards promoting goodwill.

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

1749. Absolutely. Kudos...

... you are positively correct.

It's a vile little device, mostly employed by the vile and spiteful at heart.

[saltpoint]

1754. Kick.

[dajoki]

1755. I'm not trying to make a statement, I'm just flat broke n/t