As to the "you had to vote for HRC to be able to post here" thing.

[Ken Burch]

I'm all for keeping Trump apologists and active Stein supporters away, but it's hard to say that we gain anything from limiting participation to people who were already on board.

How, exactly, does it help us to grow the party and come back from our current position of complete powerlessness for this site to ONLY be a place where people who are already with us can post?

If nothing else, shouldn't we at least be open to people who didn't vote for the ticket(or in some cases didn't vote at all) but now realize those were bad choices? And does this policy also bar those who TRIED to vote for the ticket but were barred from doing so through voter suppression?

It's hard to see how we can ever be a force for growing the party and supporting the Resistance if the only voices we hear here are part of the 49% of the vote that wasn't sufficient to win us anything in November.

Not posting any of this in any spirit other than a positive desire for us to make the best decisions on how to go forward.

[WhiteTara]

1. 700 or so posts weren't enough?

[Ken Burch]

2. What are you talking about?

I'm just discussing a site policy. That's all.

[WhiteTara]

3. There were 2 or 3 OPs on this subject

some had over 400 posts...I didn't count, but do estimate that there have been 700 or so responses to this. Isn't that enough?

[Ken Burch]

8. It's something people are naturally going to have questions about. Thus there will be OPs.

If you don't want to read them, don't.

No harm is done in posting them that I can see.

Also, please disregard the PM I just sent you. I misunderstood your intent in that post and responded as though you were talking about something else.

[janterry]

4. This is a rule on the site

really? I don't read here that much, so I didn't know that. Is there a link to the policy?

[mcar]

9. Terms of Service

You agreed to them when you joined.

[janterry]

16. ty

[DonViejo]

12. here you go...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/125912898

[unblock]

5. skinner has clarified, only those who didn't vote for hrc *and don't regret that decision*

are not welcome here.


oddly enough, there's still a small logic gap; those who *did* vote for hillary but for some inexplicable reason regret *that* decision are theoretically welcome here when they probably shouldn't be sorry, i nit-pick legal contracts for a living, can't help myself sometimes

[Ken Burch]

11. Interesting.

So, in theory, there could be a huge number of people posting "Damn I shoulda voted Gary Johnson!" OPs and they'd be golden.

Law of Unintended Consequences.

[johnsonsnap]

13. Interesting

That's heart-warming and gives me hope that there's a virtue test here.

[janterry]

20. ty (to you too)

Interesting.

I guess this has already been hashed out - so, okay. I voted for her, btw - but I'm not sure what I'd support as TOS (if that were up for a vote, which I take it - was or wasn't, but generated lots of ideas anyway .

[Maven]

6. Oh, it's you.

[Ken Burch]

41. And it's you. Each of us is who each of us is.

Have a nice weekend and say hi to Dr. DeGrasse for me.

[SharonClark]

7. Why were you compelled to start a new post?

You could have posted on one of the other 5 or 6 similar posts in the last few days where everything has been said repeatedly.

[Ken Burch]

18. I had what I thought was a different angle on it.

It's not as though people are obligated to read every OP that gets posted here.

[Skidmore]

28. I see the same old

same old rehashing of primary grievances followed by a statement claiming to not want to cause trouble. Person upthread was right. There have been several threads with over a thousand replies. Enough. I suggest you take your concerns to Skinner, who set the rule. None of these threads are really about unity.

[Ken Burch]

39. What are we defining as primary grievances, though?

It's not primary grievances, for example, to suggest that we might have run the fall campaign differently. Even people who ran that campaign recognize THAT.

And I'm not even sure(though it's not a line of argument I pursue here) that it's primary grievances to point out that there were people whose votes we might have won away from Trump, or Stein, or from sitting out voting at all, had our party, with the nominee we chose, had addressed things like trade and economic justice issues in a way that resonated with them.

People should express themselves respectfully and with sensitivity, but at a time like this, we need feedback, and we sometimes need it from people we didn't make the sale to.

My own great concern in all of this is that the insistence on saying the result was exclusively caused by Comey/The Russians/voter suppression-factors that did play a huge role, and which we need to address in whichever ways we can, although at this moment the only one of those we as a party have any realistic chance of changing by '18 and '20 is voter suppression-is that repetition of the importance of those factors is often used as an argument for not taking any hard look at ourselves as a party at all. Even if we could guarantee that none of those things would be part of the landscape in '18 and '20, we will still need to up our game and make some significantly different choices. I've had mixed feelings about Chuck Schumer in the past-it often struck me that he was far too harsh and dismissive towards progressives in NY, especially those in NYC-but I give him and those in the party allied with him credit for being open to such change.

We need to be having a conversation with all who have good, progressive ideas for the way forward.

[leftstreet]

24. Most of those threads are gloat-fests

There's not much discussion as this OP is looking for

[Me.]

10. Which Is It?

"I'm all for keeping Trump apologists and active Stein supporters away" OR "but it's hard to say that we gain anything from limiting participation to people who were already on board"

Skinner made a determination and yet you double speak... agreeing with it... And At The Same Time... arguing against it.

[Ken Burch]

14. I wrote that before I knew the "and don't regret it" thing had been added by Skinner.

n/t.

[Me.]

40. Then Why Not 'Self Delete'?

[Ken Burch]

42. Because this has produced an interesting and respectful discussion

People seem to be reading what others are posting and responding thoughtfully.

[Me.]

45. Nice Try

[guillaumeb]

15. And given the number of continuing posts that seem to be carrying on the primary

fight, it is obvious that some issues have not been resolved. There have been recent posts purporting to explain how Sanders voters were the reason for the loss, posts that avoid the far larger number of non-voters who account for even more people.

Recommended.

[Ken Burch]

19. I agree that no one should be carrying on the primary fight. It's why I never do that.

All I've been talking about is where we go next.

[guillaumeb]

23. I agree, and I was definitely not referrring to your posts.

But if we cannot recognize that the real problem is apathy and GOP voter suppression, we will be arguing the same things at DU in 2018 and 2020.

[Ken Burch]

30. Apathy is a key problem...and we're not going to break the apathy-

-if we don't find the way to speak passionately about the issues, including the economic justice issues, that affect most personally the voters we have to get to the polls-especially the 47% who didn't vote.

We have to persuade them to vote. We have to make it real to them. We can't just shame nonvoters into voting.

[guillaumeb]

31. Recommended.

[boston bean]

17. Who cares. Skinner makes the rules.

[ismnotwasm]

21. Let us cut the proverbial shit.

If you were a total loser asshole in the face of the prospect of a Trump presidency, and took your vote and flounced away like a malignant 3 year old, and are STILL defending that shit--and I've seen several variations of said defense--you are not welcome here.

If, in the heat of the moment you committed what is likely to be the biggest political cock-up of your life, tossed your vote in a misguided protest vote, BUT subsequently realize and acknowledge what a complete dick move that was--you are welcome here.

It really isn't that hard to understand. I'm mean yeah you might get some shit for it, a Trump or third party vote isn't easy to understand for most of us, myself included.

Time does match on though, and there are plenty of chances for political redemption.

[guillaumeb]

25. Well said.

I also cannot understand choosing a third party vote in a two party system. It defies logic.

[Ken Burch]

36. Most of those people can be kicked out for divisive group attack or flaming.

n/t.

[ismnotwasm]

43. Most. n/t

[Ken Burch]

44. the rest can be put on "ignore".

I have no more sympathy than you do for people who'd come on here and still say they were right to vote for Stein or Trump or who disrespected Bernie and the vast majority of his supporters by writing his name in against his wishes.

[oberliner]

47. What about people who wrote in Bernie's name?

Rather than vote for HRC.

[cwydro]

22. Look, no one knows for whom anyone voted.

People can lie if they want, or just keep their mouths shut if they don't want anyone to know that they voted for some stupid third party or didn't vote at all.

So this is much ado about nothing. I applaud Skinner for his policy...I would hope that keeps some of the worst away.

But anyone can post here obviously. I'm sure Skinner is aware of that; we all just hope that those who are members here are Dems, who intend to vote Dem...always.

[Thirties Child]

26. My somewhat different take.

I held my hose to vote for Hillary and, after seeing just how awful 45 is, seeing how much damage he's doing to the country, I've never been as proud of a vote as I am of that vote for Hillary.

[Ken Burch]

34. I hear you and stand with you.

(but you probably meant to write "held my NOSE" in that first line).

[jberryhill]

27. Where did you get the quote in your subject line?

Being "welcome" and "being able to post here" are not the same thing.

[Ken Burch]

32. It's my paraphrase of the policy.

Not being "welcome" means "not being able to post", doesn't it?

[jberryhill]

38. I don't see them as being the same thing, no

"Welcome" has a range of meanings beyond "permitted". It can mean that, but it does not necessarily have that as its sole meaning.

Anyone can walk up to my house and ring my door buzzard. Whether they are "welcome" to do so is another matter entirely.

You might be "permitted" to do something somewhere by someone, but that is a separate question of whether you are "welcome" to do so.

[Ken Burch]

46. It's hard to imagine why he would even use the term "welcome" to mean anything other than

"permitted to post".

If it meant anything less than that, why would he announce such a rule?

Barring people from posting, or threatening such a thing, is essentially the only way Skinner or anybody else running a site like this has of enforcing any policies.

Obviously, any people who tried to post pro-Trump things here(or even pro-Stein things)would realize that they weren't going to have a lot of friends around here.

I suppose, though, it could mean electronically placing the words "This Person is a Poopyhead" to every post an "officially unwelcome" poster might make. Does anyone know if that would be technologically feasible?

[regnaD kciN]

29. I'm COMPLETELY in support of the new rule...

...as long as it also applies to those "Democrats" who opted to vote for McCain/Palin over Obama/Biden in November 2008. They should no longer be welcome as well.

[Ken Burch]

33. And those who voted Bush/Cheney, Bush/Quayle, Reagan/Bush...

...and any surviving "Democrats for Nixon" from '68 or '72.

[regnaD kciN]

35. Bingo!

I'm not giving a pass to "Reagan Democrats" either.

[Madam Mossfern]

37. How can that be enforced?

Skinner (nor anybody else I hope) has access to the voting details of anyone. I see it as a wedge and deterrent to some
who honestly want to support the Democratic party and it's ideals, even some who may have indeed voted for HRC.

I thought that as Democrats that we were more open minded.
Trolls are easily recognized and their accounts can be disabled.

[oberliner]

48. If someone posts "I voted for Jill Stein"

Or something similar.