If you have time, check out this

[silvershadow]

thread I got locked in GDP. Read my post (unhide it), and then tell me what you think?

On edit: Forgot link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511937236

[Jennylynn]

1. Gotta post the thread, there.

I don't see it. Lol

[silvershadow]

3. sorry. updated the post w/link. nt

[LiberalElite]

2. You didn't post the link - is this it?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511937236

[silvershadow]

4. yes. I'm sorry, I added the link to the op. Yes, that's the one. nt

[Equinox Moon]

5. IMO...

Your thread topic was fine. It is the comments that followed in response they had to lock. The back and forth fighting is what DU tries to keep under control.

IMO.

[silvershadow]

6. But it is all true. ? Alway, thank you for your comments. nt

[LiberalElite]

7. My opinion is

you reminded them that She hasn't won yet. Can't have that.

[silvershadow]

8. Thank you for your opinion! nt

[HereSince1628]

9. That post is about you using -hide this thread-, so it's not really about the primary.

I agree with you that general election stuff isn't technically primary stuff either.

[silvershadow]

10. It is about the primary. nt

[HereSince1628]

11. It sure look like the point is how you are going to use the hide feature

because trump vs clinton stuff is in GDP.

There not much about the primaries and caucuses in that.

[silvershadow]

12. So you agree the Trump vs Clinton general election stuff belongs in a primary forum? I find

THAT to be disruptive. Sounds like a Brock "feature".

[HereSince1628]

13. No, I think that juries apply the rules quite unevenly

I think the general election stuff re clinton v trump isn't about the primary either.

But that doesn't make what you did as something other than a discussion about the discussion in GDP, which is to say a metadiscussion, and someone decided you were worth the hide. I think your approach left you unprotected from that.