I’m sick of DU bullies and cowards hiding behind anonymity

[Cyrano]

In my opinion, there are far too many ugly sentiments expressed on DU these days. Perhaps it was always thus, but I’ve begun to notice it more and more.

I’m not talking about original posts, or posts by those who disagree with the OP. I’m talking about the extreme rudeness, insults and intentional cruelty of some DUers.

Someone complains about something and the “Quit Whining” crowd shows up.

Someone posts an unpopular opinion and, rather than a counter argument, too many are content to tell the OP that he/she is an imbecile, using words that don't break DU rules.

Someone posts something that not too many people are interested in and they’re told to “Get a Life.” If it's something you're not interested in, why not just go to another thread without hurling an insult?

And even on what most would consider an “intelligent post,” there are always those who will tell the OP that he/she is insane, again using words that don’t break DU rules.

I read DU far more often than I post. But, over time, I’ve noticed that many of the bullies and cowards are the same people. I have no idea what they’re problems are, but they are taking them out on us. And they are doing so because they can do it anonymously.

Why am I using the terms “bullies” and “cowards?” Because they say things online that they would never say to someone’s face. And this is the worst form of being a bully or coward. They are totally avoiding the possibility of getting slapped, or punched out.

I can’t wait to see how many bullies and/or cowards show up on this thread.

[dionysus]

1. happens on both sides. for every "quit whining" post you have "talibama" or "pom pom wavers"

for every person who rails at any criticism whatsoever, there's someone that never got over the primaries or who thinks kucinich is the only real dem, and their goal is to make the board as miserable as they can for the obama supporters.

[Cyrano]

3. I have no idea of the meanings of "talibama" or "pom pom wavers"

[dionysus]

7. there's a post in a thread right now that calls obama supporters Talibama. just like the taliban eh?

insn't that cute?

the cheerleader\pom pom shit gets used here ad nauseum as well.

there's a huge difference between people that have valid concerns and those who have done nothing but complain and smear, on every single issue, going back for the last year +.

[rudy23]

45. I think the "whining" thing, and the VILE variety of anti-DK posts are from some kind of group.

It's like someone's reading things off of a list.

I'm not talking about the civil posts disagreeing with Kucinich, I'm talking about a certain variety of uncharacteristically vile posts that pop up from the same posters, as if on cue.

It's totally out of character for DU in a non-primary season.

[dionysus]

53. it may be because some of the harshest critics are big DK fans, a tit for tat if you will.

in my opinion, i think people in positions like DK get to say things without the backlash a president would get for saying the same thing.

i think dennis would get more results being a party organizer than a legislator.

[rudy23]

76. No there's a reason it all comes surging forward at certain times.

I also don't see the same name-calling of Obama I see towards Dennis.

I also happen to know the insurance lobby has made Dennis public enemy number one, since he drafted a single payer plan. IMO, the VILE attacks on Kucinich are an extension of that lobby's attempt(or Obama & Rahm's attempt) to take single-payer off the table. Doubly effective if you can diffuse the argument for single payer on the blogosphere. It's pretty cheap to hire people to influence the blogosphere--as opposed to paying for publicity in traditional print media. Why wouldn't they?

[Hutzpa]

80. This is not a Dennis Kucinich

thread, the OP is expressing their concerns as he is entitled to, so please do not hijack this
thread by discussing DK, thank you very much.

Let it go...

[rudy23]

101. Dionysus brought him up, take it up with him. n/t

[Echo In Light]

122. "known as the Liberator (Eleutherios), freeing one from one's normal self, by madness, ecstasy, or..

... wine."

Really sounds like someone who'd hate DK, huh? ;)

[dionysus]

108. well, i can only vouch for myself that i post for free.

:hi:

[G_j]

118. +1

[creeksneakers2]

184. Reason paid posters don't make sense

Nobody listens.

[hfojvt]

268. I cannot believe the insurance lobbty is scared of single payer

since that was never really politically on the table. It does get a little tiring hearing some people constantly whining about something that is not possible.

There's that W word, but it's hard to avoid. Some people here are not gonna like any health care reform bill that is not single payer and others here would like to see a good bill passed rather than a bad one.

As for why wouldn't the insurance lobby pay people to oppose single payer on the blogosphere? Because they don't have to. There's already a solid 40% of Americans who are dead set against single payer, and probably another 40% who realize it is politically impossible. You don't hire somebody to win the game for you when you are already ahead 52-6 with two minutes to go.

[RaleighNCDUer]

279. You might re-think your guesses on the numbers -

I sincerely doubt that 80% (40 opposed, 40 discouraged - what % favoring?) have any idea what single-payer is. As it gets NO coverage in the MSM, I would guess that no more than 60% of the population has even a clue as to what it is - and the more a person knows about it, the better it looks.

You have maybe 3% dead set against it - those who make their livings sucking money out of the system as it is. That 3% has scared a huge number into opposing something that they don't understand. The entire reason you can say '40% dead set against it' is because of the efforts of the 3% to influence that 40%, through such things as editorials, ad campaigns and, yes, the blogosphere. They have billions to lose - why wouldn't they pay a hundred schmucks 20K each to bad talk single payer as a part time gig? They know they can only win the game when THEY control the scorekeeping.

[Techn0Girl]

291. Astroturfing....

Companies spend millions on fake grass roots astroturfing campaigns on the internet. I regularly get ads to post positive reviews on sites for cash. Why would anyone not think that the GOP wouldn't spend some time on campaigns to disrupt groups such as ours?

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bertman]

56. "Branch Barackians".

:rofl: :rofl:

Very funny!! But sick.

[dionysus]

60. what, you guys repackaging the old "cult" smears? passe.

[dionysus]

58. i can understand being pissed about the mcclurkin\warren thing, but in this case, seriously, it's

the voters in maine you should blame. when was the last time you saw a president involved in a state referendum?

and your riff on the old cult meme isn't that clever.

[TokenQueer]

71. Obama is opposed to marriage equality. That's bigotry.

As for Obama's lofty distance from the common man... your argument doesn't hold water. Where is the beer summit for Maine LGBT families that were stripped of equality last night?

His sudden embrace of states' rights is puzzling. If his parents had been refused marriage rights or forced into an interracial civil union, Obama would be lucky to be head Janitor somewhere in Kansas right now.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, really I'm not. However, this complacency or outright hostility toward marriage equality among democrats starts at the top.

[grantcart]

138. how does one qualify for "talibama" or "pom pom wavers"?

I would hate to think that I missed qualifying for either.

[cliffordu]

239. You must be THIS tall to ride this ride.

[Nikki Stone1]

2. Don't forget the cowardly "unrec"

...

[rd_kent]

10. Thanks for reminding me......

[Nikki Stone1]

You're on my list. :)

There are a bunch of you...

[philly_bob]

40. Is UNREC cowardly if you also REPLY and explain your UNREC? n/t

[Vickers]

46. They never answer that.

:eyes:

[CTyankee]

55. I just did!

:eyes:

[Vickers]

62. No, you posed a question to a question. You ain't Socrates.

:eyes:

[CTyankee]

64. Read the post, not just the heading.

I think Socrates would...:eyes:

[Vickers]

70. You still don't give a real reason. You ask for things that many of us do already.

And FTR, you are doing exactly the kind of stuff the OP is talking about.

Oh, the irony!

FTR, I did Unrec this thread as I consider it whiny (and I generally comment when I Rec *or* Unrec a thread).

Plus, Vickers is my real name, "CTyankee".

[CTyankee]

148. All right, let me try to explain again.

If you Unrec a thread, you basically are saying you don't like it but if you don't explain WHY you don't like it and enumerate your points, if you just "hit and run" unrec it, you act cowardly IMO. Step up and give your reasons against what the OP is saying. State your side of the argument. Take responsibility for your Unrec.

I don't know about you, but I like a vigorous debate on DU. I don't use the Rec or Unrec because I feel it is a waste of my time. I come here to get information and to meet on common ground with many other Democrats. I have deep admiration for several posters here on DU. I feel welcome here. I learn a lot. And I have changed my mind on some things because I have heard people out and realized that they are right.

I like to think, discuss, agree and disagree, and often commiserate with other Democrats. If there is something wrong with that, then so be it...

[Vickers]

152. Thanks for the explanation.

I wish I could Rec your post (speaking of irony).

:thumbsup:

[CTyankee]

153. You are welcome, Vickers.

And thanks for the rec. I appreciate it...

[ohheckyeah]

187. Why should anyone have to explain?

People don't always explain why they rec a post either.

[CTyankee]

52. No, but then what is the purpose of Unreccomend?

If you state your reason that's laudatory. I may not agree but I have the chance to rebut with my own idea. Anyone can see my argument and side with me or against me. That's a discussion; it's open and it's fair.

[Vickers]

73. There are generally three reasons I Unrec: (a) they are complaining about the Unrec feature

or (b) they are whining, or (c) it is an obvious troll (in which case I also Alert).

FTR, I Unrec'ed this one because of (b).

[Hutzpa]

83. I then cancel your UN REC

and REC this thread because I think it is relevant, the OP does have a point and they should be allowed
to express themselves instead of people coming on his thread and being snide with their comments.

[Vickers]

85. Fair enough.

:thumbsup:

[rudy23]

141. Is the term "whining" on the list?

It comes up every single time someone complains about unrec. I think that's on the list next to "trash Dennis Kucinich" and "accuse progressives of being conspiracy theorists."

[Tom Rinaldo]

91. No, I'm fine with that...

...but if you keep track only a tiny percentage of Unrecs get owned and explained in that way. If it were otherwise I woould be OK with the Unrec function, but given how it is used in practice I really dislike it. Wait until the nect primary season when teams get organized to do Unrec hits on all threads that question their favored candidate. It's gonna happen.

[Nikki Stone1]

92. No Philly Bob, it's not. I often point out when people are not cowards and explain their unrec

I don't have a problem with you if you are brave enough to explain yourself.

[barbtries]

157. i don't think so,

i think giving a reason is fair. my opinion. i was unrec'd once, i don't know why. hell i don't even know what i posted anymore...

[sam sarrha]

168. well.... one could do that anyway without 'STEALING' someones else's VOTE..

[Subdivisions]

277. No. And my biggest UNREC pet peeve is when someone unrecs you

but doesn't bother to respond and say what's on their mind. To me they are damn dirty cowards.

[Heidi]

89. It's no more cowardly than a recommendation.

But I don't see anyone complaining about the anonymous recommendations they get.

Both rec and unrec are features offered by the DU Admins and no one should be ostracized for using the board's features.

[Nikki Stone1]

Sure it is. People often put K & R proudly.

But I never see K & U.

They're afraid to.

[Heidi]

125. I've seen many K & Us. And many of us don't post that we've recommended.

Further, it's nobody else's business how individual members use the features provided by the DU Admins.

[Ms. Toad]

195. You're not looking very hard, then. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

219. Try looking harder. K&U's have been around since unrec started. nt

[cliffordu]

240. I've done that. Just to be meaner and weirder than usual.

[SidDithers]

104. Well said...

and, for what it's worth, I also think some particular DU'ers are way too obsessed with whether their oh-so-original opinions are recc'd or unrecc'd.

It's just a fucking message board, people. Your value as a human being doesn't depend on whether your post appears on DU's Greatest Page.

Sid

[Nikki Stone1]

117. So why don't you have the balls to say when you unrec something?

Could it be you're...scared?

:rofl:

[Heidi]

126. Do you post every time you recommend something?

Is it any of your business how other DUers use the features provided by the DU Admins?

If people DID post every time they unrecced you'd probably accuse them of being bullies.

[Nikki Stone1]

188. I have never accused any one of being a bully for unrec'ing.

You can check my posts to people who have posted their unrecs. I have often said things like, "Well at least you have the guts to post why you unrec'd," or some other similar phrase.

And I wish you would do your research before you start throwing around accusations. It makes you look really silly.

[Heidi]

246. You imply that those who don't post that they've unrecced are gutless.

That's simply not true. If I unrec a thread based on its lack of quality, why on earth would I kick it up by posting "Unrecced"? It has nothing to do with cowardice.

[SidDithers]

131. Yeah, you've figured me out...

I'm an anonymous poster on an internet message board, and I'm scared of the opinions of a bunch of other anonymous posters. :eyes:

Sid

[Nikki Stone1]

189. If you weren't scared and actually had testicles, you'd post why instead of unrec'ing and running

like a little kid. :)

[SidDithers]

216. I don't unrec and run...

I unrec, and then stick around to watch you make a fool of yourself. :hi:

Sid

[Techn0Girl]

233. Thank you

I always appreciate it when someone like yourself makes a post (or many posts ) that let me know to put them immediately on ignore so that I am not bohered again with such nonsense in the future.

[Heidi]

259. If someone's unreccing a less than high quality thread, why kick it by posting "Unrec"?

No one owes you an explanation for why they unrec a thread. :)

[Warren Stupidity]

221. leaping assumptions!

not all unrecs are anonymous not all recs are named. You've assumed something for which you have no evidence.

Here is a clue: try comparing the top ten by recs with the ten top posts on the greatest page. They generally are close to the same list. The power of the U is mostly in the minds of the unrecophobic.

[PeaceNikki]

174. Stop making sense, Heidi!

[earcandle]

244. I had no idea rec and unrec was such an issue! I recommend, but never unrec. Why do that? To

squash someone's pov?  That is not a democracy.

[rudy23]

142. I agree. I've been talking about "unrec" and the "whining" talking point since July.

Along with the curiously timed and over the top attacks on Dennis Kucinich which just so happened during the time that single payer was being kneecapped to start the reform process.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6098846&mesg_id=6098951

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6022082

[Heidi]

284. You still haven't answered my question. Why would anyone post "Unrec" and kick an unworthy thread?

You seem to believe that it's cowardly for folks to anonymously unrecommend DU threads. Allow me to educate you about the way many DUers, including myself, use the Rec and Unrec feature.

How I use the Recommend feature:
1. Recommend a thread that is especially timely and/or of interest to this progressive community.
2. If the thread is dropping and has few replies, I often post "Recommended" to kick it back up so that others can see it on the front page of GD or other big forum.

How I use the Unrecommend feature:
3. Unrecommend a thread that is unprogressive, has absolutely no political or current events context, mean-spirited, blatantly unreasoned, or redundant (as in, this has been posted a jillion times, not unlike the pout fests about the unrec feature).
4. Do not post "Unrec" for a couple of reasons: 1. Posting "Unrec" would kick an unworthy thread back up and kick more worthy threads DOWN; 2. "If you don't have something nice to say..."

No one should be called a coward for using the Unrecommend feature, which was provided to all of us by the Admins. If you've got a bone to pick about the Unrec thread, take it up privately with the Admins. Somehow, I doubt you'll be so eager to call the creators of this very fine feature "cowardly."

[PeaceNikki]

286. Here's Blue-Jay's notes on Unrec and I agree 100%

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6926410#6926811


1) The thread is not about politics. This is a political website (aside from the Lounge, where rec/unrec is not an issue)

2) The OP is complaining about "recs & unrecs". (Bad Form = automatic unrec)

3) The OP is seeking personal attention, instead of rational discussion. (also Bad Form)

4) The thread is posted by a troll seeking to sow discontent. (Obviously, this is subjective.)

5) The thread adds nothing. (ie. "FUCK REPUKES!" or "Did you just see what _____ said on TV?")

6) The thread is stupid. (Again, this is very subjective, but I know stupid when I see it. If I'm wrong about the stupidity of a thread, my vote will probably be overruled so there's no harm done.)

[Heidi]

289. Oh, no! I agree with Blue-Jay

AGAIN! :rofl:

Hey, PeaceNikki! :fistbump:

[SIMPLYB1980]

4. Yawn. Can't take the heat,

get out of the kitchen.

[Zodiak]

25. You are one of the worst

Which reminds me.....(ignore)

[SIMPLYB1980]

69. Good.

:P :hug:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

30. You are one of the ones the OP is referring to

The way you decided to hijack my post last week about the inhumane practices of factory farms without even reading the article outed you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6880737#6882593

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rudy23]

54. Good eye---some of the user names are dead giveaways.

Anyone with something like "Bushsucks" or "Blue Stater" reeks of overcompensation, especially when you read their posts that obviously shill for the DLC.

[Echo In Light]

65. I mean user names that sound edgy, as in, one who lends credence to heterodoxy, conspiracy, etc

Yet some with those type of 'sounding' user names often come on with horrible, impassioned, pitch-black hatred for any who even tacitly supports the questioning of the official/establishment/orthodox position re any potentially controversial matter ("controversial" because there's obviously the ugly reality of the situation, versus what the two Name Brand party position more or less is on the subject - often denial of any obvious wrongdoing - and is subsequently espoused by the majority of M$M outlets and pundits, thus creating a pseudo "reality" for the public mind)

[rudy23]

77. Those too--I definitely agree. Some cover up by sounding "edgy" and some are just ham handed.

I've definitely noticed what you're seeing, too.

[Echo In Light]

84. I know what you're getting at, also. Some choose very 'know-it-all' sounding names, too

... and, gee, surprise-surprise when they in fact come off that way in how they choose to interact w/others while using an anonymous medium. Those types remind me of the big-mouths every neighborhood had when I was a kid...the ones who would wait until they were at least half a block away before running their mouth at someone who could and di easily kick their sorry ass. The Orwellian names are the ones that more so come off as having an agenda here.

[Hutzpa]

93. ditto

it's like seeing day light.

[TicketyBoo]

63. I'd be interested in seeing that list. n/t

[rd_kent]

97. Please share "the list"?

Am I on it?

[SidDithers]

112. If you weren't before, you got added with post #10...

be proud. You're in good company.

Sid

[rd_kent]

158. wow, THATS all it takes??????

I guess I need not try so hard.

[QC]

123. Some people here don't act like liberals so much as Freeper stereotypes of liberals.

They stick out like a sore thumb. Basically, if the use name contains something like "radical" or "activist" and there's a Marx or Che avatar, we're talking Troll-O-Rama.

[MilesColtrane]

150. 'the list'?

Really?

Somebody has way too much emotional investment in this internet thing.

[fascisthunter]

44. I recommend others click on your link (nt)

[SIMPLYB1980]

72. LoL!

Still butt hurt about that. :shrug:

[spiritual_gunfighter]

74. It seems I am not the only one that has taken note of you n/t

[SIMPLYB1980]

75. I've been here for a long time. I'm sure many people

have noticed me before and will again in the future.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

81. The great thing about DU is

I dont have to notice you anymore. Congratulations, you are the first person I have ever ignored on DU.

[SIMPLYB1980]

90. Oh good another ignore.

I think that is the one feature on DU that should end before the unrec feature.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SIMPLYB1980]

105. Am I on you're ignore list yet?

:spank:

[Flaneur]

33. If the shoe fits...

[LanternWaste]

43. Seems to me that criticizing an unnecessarily high temperature

Seems to me that a valid critique of an unnecessarily high temperature and not being able "to take it" are two completely different things...

[SIMPLYB1980]

5. Dupe.

[PeaceNikki]

6. Welcome to the internets.

[Number23]

181. I know, right?? Good grief!

If everyone gave back as good as they were given, people would be a lot nicer. I know I've had to school a couple of people who came at me with guns a'blazing and then got quite the shock when those same guns got turned right back on them.

Having said that, there are a few posters here who are INCAPABLE of typing a single post without using profanity and screaming as though the whole damn world was ending tomorrow. Their sad attempts to look all Billy/Betty Badass actually make them look more like Goofus from those old Highlights magazines.

[PeaceNikki]

185. And as Pri said... it's not real life. If you take it that seriously and/or personally

you really should consider stepping away from the computer for a while.

[Techn0Girl]

235. Wrong...

I hear that a lot on "teh internets".
"Oh,It's only the internet".... "Oh, don't take it seriously, it;s not real life"

And frankly that, in my opinion, is the sort of immature thinking that allows the worst offenders to keep on offending.

No, it's not "only the internet". It's a real person making hurtful remarks in writing to another real person. It's real and it's inexcusable.

[PeaceNikki]

238. Your disagreement is noted. It doesn't mean I am wrong.

[NoSheep]

8. Agreed....The web is a great place for some bullies to hide.

I don't have a filter (I'm told) I'll just tell a jerk they're a jerk to their face. I don't seem to have any control over it.

BTW...your screen name is ironic for this post :D

[Cyrano]

17. I try to not sully my white plume

[frazzled]

9. It's the way of the Internets

I generally ignore the bullies. Though sometimes I find even myself having written something, with no rancor--merely an intent to contest an opinion and argue a different way--and wonder if my post looks bullyish, too. Without tone of voice, it's really difficult to impart the subtle things that personal communication allows.

That said, you have a point: I think that on both the left and right, the kind of Internet communication has leaked out into the real world, in effect coarsening our entire conversation about politics. We see it on tv every day. I was remembering back to the days of William F. Buckley and Crossfire. Didn't agree with a thing the guy said or stood for, but he was a gentleman, more or less, and respected his adversaries. That just wouldn't happen today.

[petronius]

18. I think your first paragraph sums up a lot of it - it's too easy to assume a

negative tone when a post disagrees. I've seen a lot of accusations of 'bullying' when a neutral 3rd party (me) can clearly see that the posts are really just stating an opposing view. However, there are a few people who seem to be here just to spew bile, and I don't think it has to do with the primaries or anything else, I think it just makes them feel better/happy in some way.

Something I often wonder about your second point is whether things really used to be more courteous in the good old days, or if we just remember the high points. It could be that the coarse and obnoxious types have always been here, they just get forgotten more quickly...

[eleny]

11. Well said

I don't know why I don't use my Ignore List more often. This might be the only personal solution. At least it's not against the rules to let the offending person know about it in advance and then *zap*.

[Cleita]

15. Curious thing I noticed about my ignore list is that it gets smaller

each time some one on it gets tomb stoned. Most of my ignores are no longer here. Of course I occasionally have to add a new one, but I know that person will disappear from DU in time.

[eleny]

20. Wow, you've got the magic touch!

:D

[CountAllVotes]

50. noticed that too

many that have been/are on ignore are no longer here. They have been tomb stoned yes. :applause:

[TicketyBoo]

79. If I ever use the "Ignore" feature

I won't be advertising that fact.

I'm convinced that announcing it would give the Ignoree a sense of smug satisfaction.

[eleny]

145. They may talk smug but I think it bothers them that they've lost part of their audience

[countingbluecars]

12. It helps when I remind myself

how lucky I am that these people are not part of my real life.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

me too

[UTUSN]

13. K&R #5, but the UnReKKKers knocked it down to 3!1 But flamers are an old constant

They are the scum of the earth, right next to wingnuts.

[A HERETIC I AM]

110. Out of curiosity, do you really mean to equate a DU member who unrecs a thread ...

to being a member of the Ku Klux Klan?

Seriously?

"UnReKKKers"

What a load of crap.

[UTUSN]

159. Are you doing performance art, acting out the premise of the thread?!1

And, "seriously," were you really interested in an answer before reaching your epithet?!1


However, to satiate your curiosity (if there really was any), the UnReKKKing I refer to are those given to innocuous threads, where a mere response would suffice without the thread having a mark of Cain put on it.

But thanks for proving my point, resting my case, jumping da bones!1

[A HERETIC I AM]

163. Your using the 3 letter "KKK" inside a noun regularly used on this message board

implies that you equate those that use the unrec feature to members of a white supremacist group.

What other possible reason for using that reference is there?

I think doing such a thing is absurd.

Perhaps I should rephrase;

You just used "KKK" in the middle of that word because you think it somehow shames members of this message board who use the feature.

Or you don't think very much at all.

[UTUSN]

214. I answered/responded to your specifics. YOU attack. Nothing more to say. n/t

[blondeatlast]

255. It's not an attack, it's an honest question. I call the casual calling of opposing DUers

"KKK"ers a very, very low blow.

And geez, I rarely if ever agree with "A HERETIC."

[UTUSN]

278. You, too, are demonstrating one of the techniques of flaming, which is

to ignore the specific response and evade, dismiss, and broadbrush a "reply" that attacks.

Yes, it *was* an attack. What do you call something that has "crap" in the response.

No, it was *not* "an honest question." I replied very specifically, that very frequently the UnReKKK is used for INNOCUOUS or otherwise characteristically Democratic threads, threads that do NOT call for it. To repeat since you ignored this the first time, my response was SPECIFIC. *I* have used the UnRec for clearly WINGNUT, RACIST, or otherwise troll threads, so, to repeat (3rd time) I did not say that EVERYBODY who uses the function was this, that, or anything. AND I didn't engage in "casual calling."

No, it was *not* an honest question," part deux: The other poster posed the supposedly "honest" question then went directly to using the word "crap."

Thanks for your concern.

[A HERETIC I AM]

283. What's "Crap" is your usage of an epithet meant specifically to demean

an entire group of DU members by associating them with the Ku Klux Klan merely because they use an administrator approved feature of this message board in a fashion you don't approve of.

If you feel my using the word "crap" was an attack, fine. I didn't say you were crap, I said your usage of that term was a load of crap. I think you using "KKK" inside that word is tantamount to calling me and every other DU'r that uses the unrec feature a hood wearing, torch flaming, cross burning, homophobic, lynching, cowardly racist.

It was an ENTIRELY honest question. I wanted to know if you actually equate people who use that feature with members of the KKK. Your dodge was not only laughable, it was badly worded and pointless.
Here was my supposdly "not honest" question;

Out of curiosity, do you really mean to equate a DU member who unrecs a thread to being a member of the Ku Klux Klan? Seriously? "UnReKKKers" What a load of crap.

To which you replied;

Are you doing performance art, acting out the premise of the thread?! And, "seriously," were you really interested in an answer before reaching your epithet?! However, to satiate your curiosity (if there really was any), the UnReKKKing I refer to are those given to innocuous threads, where a mere response would suffice without the thread having a mark of Cain put on it. But thanks for proving my point, resting my case, jumping da bones!1

"Performance art"? "Mark of Cain"? "jumping da bones"? What an incredibly non sequitur laden post. Regardless of whether or not a thread is "innocuous" do you honestly think it is appropriate to associate a fellow DU'r with an infamous white supremacist group merely because they used a feature of this board?

No, it was *not* "an honest question." I replied very specifically, that very frequently the UnReKKK is used for INNOCUOUS or otherwise characteristically Democratic threads, threads that do NOT call for it.

Yeah, you were specific alright. Specifically justifying your usage of a patently offensive and insulting term that characterizes other members of this board in a reprehensible way.


But carry on. There isn"t a damned thing I can do about it except alert on posts where I see it used in the future. One consolation for you; You aren't the only one to use KKK tacked onto a word or a name, not by a long shot.

[UTUSN]

285. To tie up the loose ends, although my non-attack responses will probably

get deleted in the whole sub-thread, undeservedly so:


What do you call "you don't think very much at all" if not an attack (along with the other examples already cited). And it's a rhetorical question, since I'm saying "toodle-oo" to this, so you can continue playing "last word."

You continue to ignore my specifics and conflate them into your misinterpretations, continuing to cite ANYBODY WHO USES the UnReKKK and ALL of UnReKKK. My specifics EXCLUDED "ALL" persons using the function and identified those who were doing so MALICIOUSLY. No, Admin does not sanction malicious use.

I've been using the KKKarl ROVE deal-ly from the first time ever referring to him. I guess I could call him "P.O.S." or any number of other things. It's merely a device capitalizing on the letter already in his legal name and associating him with an alliterative way of saying "P.O.S."

As for your not being able to "do a damned thing about it," believe me, you have done quite enough. The hatred dripping from your posts is just... oh, nevermind.

At least I found a pal for you who never agreed much with you before!1

[A HERETIC I AM]

287. ...

:banghead:

[Cleita]

14. You and I have been here approximately the same amount of time and

I have noticed the increase in incivility. There are some DUers who are unnecessarily rude, but I believe most are trolls with hidden agendas who probably will be tomb stoned down the road. In the meantime, I try to keep that in mind when I'm attacked for no good reason.

[cry baby]

16. I have been here about as long as you, Cyrano...

I stopped reading here much about 2 yrs ago due to life's circumstances. I've come back recently and noticed more bullying. There was always some, but it seems to be here now to a greater degree.

Lots of people seem to be grouchy and don't seem to want to find common ground.

That said, these are the most informed people on the internet and I'll likely never leave...I just won't post much.

[Cyrano]

267. I hear you. You are not alone.

And I can only hope that life's circumstances get better.

With much caring,

Cyrano

[CountAllVotes]

19. agree

I do have a few people on ignore. I find it almost amusing when I see threads that have a lot of bickering going on and I see the word IGNORE IGNORE IGNORE as the bickering goes on.

I know it is not just me. There are some around that like to stir up the pot and hoist one against the other. What good comes of this fails to register with me.

I'd say use the ignore feature as needed.

[JohnnyLib2]

37. Good idea, I'm going to try that.

Hadn't thought of 'ignore' in that way before.

Rec.

[Romulox]

21. k/r. It would help if the basic rules were enforced. nt

[TN al]

22. Recced you back up to five.

your post made me think of another phenomenom that is present on the internet, and in schoolyards, and most definitely at DU. Probably just another form of what you are decrying though. The pack mentality that on occassion rears its head here. With all of the small dogs waiting for the big dog to notice the thread. Actually had a response to an OP once that said just wait til _____ sees this. Lots of small yapping until the big dog showed and then the onslaught began. I held my own, as far as I am concerned anyway, I mean this is the internet nobody is really going to punch me and I am big enough that in real life it is unlikely to happen there either, but I remember who you are and if you are like most cliques you are clueless as to who I am talking about.

[rucky]

23. I'd say there are about 10 or so repeat offenders that need to go.

[Echo In Light]

29. Yet they're miraculously never called on their hate-spew...

Sorta makes a guy wonder if maybe someone 'up top' wants those belligerent haters on board ....

[ixion]

24. You're right, Cyrano, it wasn't always like this

I think that as DU has grown in popularity, the DLC'ers have shown up and are being the bullies and cowards that they are.

[cali]

27. oh for pity's sake.

I see the ever popular DLC whipping boy is now the cause of all rudeness on DU.

[redqueen]

57. Rudeness / incivility from "REAL progressives/liberals/etc" is not really rude.

They're trying to help, see? So it's the GOOD kind of nastiness.

[Peregrine Took]

31. You are correct. There are way too many "DLC/rethug lites" here since

Obama came on the scene.

[seabeyond]

36. hm. i was here before you. not that i consider myself either two,

but i am not far left. moderate. center. those horrid words. but i believe i have validation in being a part of the whole. not only my vote, but mmy repug hubby vote. my repug father vote. and others. i do my part

you dont want me????

[tammywammy]

114. Ditto here

I'm also a dreaded moderate. :shrug:

[seabeyond]

120. gigglin.... lol

evilness, you.

[rudy23]

47. I think their thuggish behavior sticks out like a sore thumb, and identifies them as not legit. n/t

[rudy23]

48. Think about it---if you were in the DLC, wouldn't you want to ruin the blogoshpere?

It's the best tool of the actual left. How would they be able to enact a corporate agenda with the liberal blogosphere doing such a good job of organizing the facts and presenting concise arguments?

[TicketyBoo]

102. So you're saying that if you're not

part of the "actual left" (whatever that means), then you shouldn't be here?

Because I actually like a medium-rare steak now and then. I can go away now? I don't belong here because I (gasp!) eat meat?

Something tells me this place is going to be very sparsely populated if people who may approach the center (at least in some areas) are not welcome.

[rudy23]

144. There's a difference between being moderate and corporate/anti-Dem

What the DLC is stands in direct contradiction to the Democratic platform. It's not a gradiation of the same thing.

[barbtries]

26. i agree with you

after posting what i considered an innocuous response to a post yesterday, the poster came back at me with "Icehole!"

this is a discussion board, and we are supposed to be grown ups. i'm too sensitive i suppose, but i felt the name-calling was out of line.

[TicketyBoo]

106. I was called

a "f**king idiot" and a "douchebag," so join the club.

[Fire1]

178. Most have been called those things, too. n/t

[seabeyond]

28. thank you for the reminder cyrano. i use to be nice, lol. and thank you for the

reminder last night on your thread, how to behave. being above it.

[SidDithers]

32. Same as it ever was...

Sid

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Iggo]

35. Thanks, Cyrano...if that's your REAL name.

:rofl:

[Poll_Blind]

38. Yep- I agree on all counts. Listen to me though: There is no way this is going to change.

This has been going on for a very long time and (you're right) it's been creeping in more and more. The problem is that those who do this habitually (sometimes daily) and who are known for this behavior should be a tip-off of sorts to the fact that nothing's going to happen to them.

I could postulate forever about the causes of this but it would probably be pointless: It just IS. And it's highly doubtful that, at this point, it's going to go away.

I know you remember a different tone at DU, and that's how I like to remember it. Back when the signal to noise and conversation to flame ratio was much, higher.

Now, it's almost like some of these malignant personalities are regular performers on a bizarre stage they've (mostly successfully) turned DU into. It's surreal but then again anything online has the potential to morph like this.

I keep reading DU, though I don't post much anymore for the same reasons you probably don't, because there are still some posters who refuse the crap and continue to post and discuss in a civil, thoughtful way. But mostly, it's become a weird cross between the DU of old and Craigslist (or YouTube comments)- just so much anger...cutting other posters down for sport.

Someone else put it best when they said this place was the "Best political MMO game ever!" And the griefers are out of control.

Or another "It's a place for talkin' and fightin' not doin'......but, talkin' and fightin's fun." So true.

[dionysus]

67. the difference you see is the difference between when bush was in power and when a democrat took

over.

i find it amazing that people are surprised when on a message board for democrats, people who constantly trash the president get roasted by his defenders...

seems like the natural outcome to me.

[Cyrano]

98. " ... cutting other posters down for sport." Well put, Poll_Blind.

[Egnever]

245. Ahh yes the good old days

when farts smelled like roses! I remember them well.

LOL

You clearly werent here in 2004

[BlancheSplanchnik]

263. I liked this post

and agreed with the OP. I think the OP makes a very good point, that how we behave towards each other has consequences. I don't subscribe to the "oh it's nothing, just the internets" meme. It IS something, because it's human behavior.

There's still cooperative discussion that goes on here too, though. I mean, there's alot of snark, but the are also a good many people who have high personal standards that they pretty much live up to. I mean, Up to which they pretty much live.

On the subject of snark, it seems to have become the culturally kewwwl thing, I guess--which I think was very much reinforced during the "reign of error". That repuke (and I say 'puke' in the most pejorative way possible), figurehead role modeled boorish swaggering for eight years. How could that not affect cultural norms? (on that note, there's a fairly recent book that I'd like to read, called "The Culture of Snark".)

I'd say dextrous verbal dueling has always been a power thing, and jockeying for power is part of human life. Compulsively seeking to feel powerful is a pretty base substitute for developing self-respect, I guess. The question --or the question for me, anyway, that I try to internalize-- is whether or how consistently I can live up to my goal of being conscious of how I'm treating someone. Would I respect someone who behaved as I'm behaving? Who do I respect and can I take their example?

And it's true, the talkin' and fightin, is fun. I'm just getting more conscious of the wheres and whyfors of it.

I guess the best anyone can do, it they're concerned with doing their best, is try to think about what one does and improve from there.

[euphoria12leo]

41. I made a comment

on a thread about Glen Beck. I said that he would lose seven more advertisers after losing eleven (I think) and he did. A troll was on the thread and responded. I didn't get back to check out the reply in time. The name was removed. Ha ha ha. I guess they posted a ugly comment.


:eyes:

[Vickers]

42. Is Cyrano your real name?

Because Vickers is mine.

[sufrommich]

49. I don't know why anyone would be surprised that an

internet forum does not mimic real life.

[zonkers]

59. Hurtful remarks hurt feelings and derail healthy discourse.

[jberryhill]

61. Then use your real name

I have a hard time taking people seriously who don't.

[seabeyond]

66. i had someone from a repug board picking up things i was saying. my city.

they live 2 hours from me. married. hubby own a specific business. when i read this on their site, i was really glad i did not use my real name

how wise is that?

[jberryhill]

113. It's called having the courage of your convictions

I run a business too.

[seabeyond]

121. no... it is called, this person was talking about visiting with me. it is called, safety.

since my last name is the only one in the phone book, with address, wouldnt be hard for a stranger on the net to knock on my door.

[jberryhill]

130. We have differing definitions of the word courage

Yes, "safety" and "courage" are related concepts.

I've been ID'd by freeper conspiracists as an agent of George Soros, and was further ID'd in an article debunking birtherism.

Aside from a couple of odd phone calls, these keyboard commandoes don't concern me.

Absolutely, taking a public position and attaching your name to it involves a safety risk. That was my point. The OP's point is that anonymity allows people to be moral monsters, which is also true.

[seabeyond]

whatever dude, i have two kids and female and dont know how to shoot a gun. be brave. nt

[LanternWaste]

139. And leave one's doors unlocked...

And leave one's doors unlocked with a sign that reads, "please take it all..."

[TicketyBoo]

165. That's an easy thing to say

sitting there in Joe Biden's Delaware.

Not such a great idea using one's real name when there is an effigy of a black man hanging from a tree 14 blocks from my house. And the police won't do anything about it.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

68. DU has a smiley for threads just like this...

:nopity:

[Cerridwen]

78. As the teabaggers have shown, it's an effective way to shut down

and/or divert a message or conversation.

"We" allow bullying in the US and some people mistake it for "toughness." Volume equals strength or some such absurdity.

The inverse of that being that anyone who complains about bullying is labeled a whiner or overly sensitive; which of course, are bad things. So bullies get to tell people to "grow a thicker skin," play the victim, then make the sensitive person the bully. Every time I read something like that, I always hear, "How dare you question my right to be an obnoxious piece of garbage. I'm soooooo sorry YOU were offended." Sound familiar?

Watch the teabaggers, rush, hannity, et. al. to see it in action.

I'm not too surprised to see it here. It has become an accepted "fact" of "the internet." Accepted; as in immutable and unchangeable. Of course, all it takes to change the immutable fact of bullying on the internet is...don't allow it. Instead, I see people say, "that's just the way it is" rather than question whether or not it has to be that way. Sad. Really.

I also notice you got a couple of those type replies here; in addition to the picking-nits variety that ignore the whole to zero in on the unstated nits. Nit-wits. Now that term makes sense.

Anyway, my two-cent contribution.

[SIMPLYB1980]

82. Which is why some of us do it to help toughen

the progressives up. If all they heard was what they wanted to hear how ready would they really be to debate someone? Same goes for the shit moderates get here. We try as best we can to explain ourselves but our attempts end up getting the same idiocy from the progressives as they complain about us. Tea baggers take the crazy to another level all together and I think there is zero debating them in which case it's O.K. for progressives and moderates to be as nasty to them as they want to be.

[seabeyond]

86. oh bull. the adult bully that teases the little one to tears to toughen 'em up. about stupid.

and mean. and nonproductive. doesnt meet any goal.

[SIMPLYB1980]

88. Do you deny that the bullying goes both ways?

Seriously it's not non productive especially when that is the best you can hope for on the internet.

[seabeyond]

99. both ways? what are you talking about? an individual makes a choice to be a bully or not.

it isn't about party or anything else. it is a personal choice and we are all responsible for the choice we make.

[SIMPLYB1980]

107. See post 103.

[Cerridwen]

94. So you admit you are a bully.

That's the first step.

The next step would be to understand that your bullying does not equal strength or toughness or debate. Though I sincerely doubt you'll make that next step.

Take a look around at the public discourse these days. How has attempting to out-shout and out-offend each other given us any discussion about issues of concern or any semblance of debate?

"If all they heard was what they wanted to hear how ready would they really be to debate someone?"

That is not what the OP is about nor is it what my reply was about. My reply wasn't about differing opinions or ideas, it was about attempts to drown out anything with which one doesn't agree.

You confuse debate with bullying; loud with truth.

[SIMPLYB1980]

103. I've admitted that for a long time.

I do not think that it equals strength or toughness and there are many degrees of bullying. The right are the biggest bullies on the planet by default and sometimes it takes a dick (like Rahm) to counter an asshole. The left and right bully the middle and the middle bullies them back and all is right with the universe everyone is equal. I would like all sides to stop bullying but that's not going to happen so I live in the real world and deal with it.

[Cerridwen]

109. As I said...

"I'm not too surprised to see it here. It has become an accepted "fact" of "the internet." Accepted; as in immutable and unchangeable. Of course, all it takes to change the immutable fact of bullying on the internet is...don't allow it. Instead, I see people say, "that's just the way it is" rather than question whether or not it has to be that way. Sad. Really."

[SIMPLYB1980]

115. We agree I think it's sad to, but

you have to work within the system to change it. Hopefully after the health care debate is over we could work on that, but with two wars still going, and the left over animosity for our government after Bush, I see it getting worse before it gets better.

[Cerridwen]

197. When you work inside the system and play by the rules

rather than against the rules, you perpetuate the system.

I'd rather take an arm-full of facts rather than a bullhorn to a debate.

[LanternWaste]

129. Interesting...

Interesting (and self-validating) method to describe one's use of incivility and boorish behavior.

Let the righteous justifications begin...

[seabeyond]

137. Let the righteous justifications begin... lol lol. nt

[rudy23]

146. Notice that most healthcare or Obama-critical posts have lately started out with a long argument

I think they are using the exact same strategy as was stated by the teabaggers, "no matter how vile, never let the debate come down to facts. Derail with name calling."

Astroturf comes from the left as well as the right. Astroturfing the blogosphere is WAY cheaper than trying to control the message via the corporate media. Why wouldn't the DLC want to get the pesky blogosphere off it's back? Why wouldn't they want us to start doubting the legitimacy of these sites?

The blogosphere is the DLC's biggest enemy, and the easiest to mess with!

[Cerridwen]

198. Actually, I haven't noticed.

I'll pay more attention.

[Ignis]

204. That's worth a lot more than $0.02, Cerridwen.

It speaks to the very core of the problem. :hi:

[Cerridwen]

208. Why, thank you.

And, howdy backatcha.

:hi:

[Ignis]

210. Having been at more than a few anti-war protests...

...in which we were drowned out by proto-Teabaggers with megaphones, boomboxes, rape sirens, etc., I'll be the first to agree that there's a difference between "freedom of speech" and "freedom to do anything and everything possible to ensure that someone else's free speech doesn't get heard."

[Cerridwen]

211. Oh, yeah.

Isn't it the truth? So sad many here don't have that kind of experience to which to compare.

Good to meet you, by the way. :D

:hi:

[Nye Bevan]

87. How can I "tell someone that they are an imbecile using words that do not break DU rules"

when personal attacks are against DU rules? :shrug:

[Cerridwen]

207. Practice, practice, practice.

It's called subtlety.

It's quite entertaining to watch. I highly recommend it.

I think it was PCIntern who had a really great OP in which the remarks were so subtle...it was artistic genius. But, it wasn't against DU rules as it wasn't against a DUer.

[Cyrano]

282. Okay, here's an example.

Ignorance is not hereditary and there's no reason that one need suffer with it. Then again, if absolute ignorance of reality is within your comfort zone, by all means, stay with it.

That paragraph was not aimed at you. It was nothing more than a random demonstration of how to reply to someone obnoxious without breaking the DU rules. No one would get a post deleted for the above paragraph. The only down side is that, whoever that paragraph is aimed at would, in all probability, not "get it."

Although my OP was about rudeness and cruelty toward other DUers, there really are disgusting or despicable posts that require a response. And I prefer to keep my responses in the realm of the above example (although it is much milder than actual ones I have posted). Of course, there are times when all of us go completely nuts over something we've read and totally lose it. No matter. Our "insanely angry" replies will be deleted within minutes.

[dhpgetsit]

95. All the nastiness we are seeing in DU is a symptom.

All the nastiness we are seeing in DU is caused by our disappointment in our government. Where we lay the blame covers the spectrum. Some of us lay it on Obama, while others lay it everywhere but on Obama. We get frustrated with people who don't see things our way and lash out at them with countless creative epithets. It reminds me of the Republicans.

Why are we and the Republicans so disappointed in our government? We may blame eachother, but in my opinion, the main reason is that the government is bought and paid for. With just a few exceptions, Congress is at the beck and call of Corporate Interests. Republicans prefer the term "Special Interests" but we actually have some common ground to work with. We all want a government that is more responsive to We the People.

I certainly don't expect DUers and Teabaggers to hold hands and sing Kumbaya, but if we keep pointing out the real reasons our government is broken, the cooler heads on both sides might be able to...

Nah, it'll never happen. Forget it. Corporations are going to win permanent control.

[seabeyond]

100. ah well, i think the net has a lot to do with it too. bushco. anger and hate feeding on itself. nt

[Echo In Light]

124. "Going to?"

As to the rest of it ... Divide & Rule

[dhpgetsit]

160. I still think if we could focus on the problem instead of sniping at eachother

We could take the government back.

[Echo In Light]

161. The snipping stems from the divide between those who know the score, and those who love The Game

Taking back, or, more accurately, re-claiming any genuine semblance of healthy, transparent democracy, of, for and by The People, will require far, far more than what most Americans will ever even be remotely aware of, if you follow. Such things simply are not a part of mainstream discourse, and why would they be given the obvious interest this country's dominant institutions have in maintaining the current, illusory, phony "democracy?" Such social systems aren't interested in self-sabotage.

So, it doesn't really have anything to do w/people snipping and barking at one another since most of that type of noise stems from those deeply in denial as to the true nature and scope of the broader dilemma: it's a brainwashed populace.

[Cyrano]

288. "... take the government back." Are you talking about civil war?

The problem with a civil war in today's world is identifying the "enemy."

From 1861 to 1864, enemies lived in different geographical areas and wore either blue or grey uniforms.

So what do we do today? Knock on someone's door and ask them if they're the enemy?

I'm not against your idea of "taking our government back." But I am at a loss of how to do it.

[Kitsune]

111. This happens everywhere. Trolls eventually learn where the line is and how to tiptoe up to it.

I've dealt with this as a moderator on other forums, and a troll that learns exactly where the letter of the law draws the line quickly recalls the behavior of a 7-year-old; tiptoeing up to a line, putting a pinkie toe over it, and running away giggling at how clever they are.

I've only ever had to deal with it from individuals myself, so I can just imagine the fun time the DU moderators are having dealing with an entire contingent of such people showing up to threads, unreccing them because someone dared to offer criticism (constructive or not) of Obama, and occasionally posting what they think are immensely witty quips regarding ponies.

[Blue_In_AK]

116. I agree with you.

There are a few people around here whose posts almost always make me cringe, and I'm not sure why they're allowed to remain as DUers in good standing, especially since some of my own dear departed friends here seemed far less guilty.

I always just consider the source and ignore their posts.

[Strelnikov_]

119. " . . using words that don't break DU rules."

I feel these individuals are continually breaking the rules.

Note Forum Rules 3 & 4 as follows:

3. Civility: Treat other members with respect. Do not post personal attacks against other members of this discussion forum.

4. Content: Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements. The moderators and administrators work very hard to enforce some minimal standards regarding what content is appropriate. But please remember that this is a large and diverse community that includes a broad range of opinion. People who are easily offended, or who are not accustomed to having their opinions (including deeply personal convictions) challenged may not feel entirely comfortable here. A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum.

“Quit Whining” ~ Treat other members with respect, inflammatory
“Get a Life.” ~ Treat other members with respect, inflammatory
tell the OP that he/she is insane ~ Treat other members with respect, inflammatory, divisive

[SIMPLYB1980]

135. Just so we get both sides.

"Cheerleader" ~ inflammatory
"Pom-Poms" ~ inflammatory
"Evil Moderates" ~ inflammatory
"Corporate sell outs" ~ inflamatory

The list is long on both sides. How much speech do you not want on DU?

[Bluenorthwest]

167. Evil Moderates is not only inflamatory but it is redundant

[Mithreal]

192. There are more than two sides.

[SIMPLYB1980]

196. This is true.

Don't even know if all the sides can be counted.

[question everything]

169. Exhibit A of breaking the rules: U

especially the anonymous ones.

A clever way of by passing the rules of, for example, not stalking another DUer.

Just the other day someone commented about the idiotic U and then, later on the same thread, decided to U the post because... he does not like the poster.

This is what many of us, objecting to the U have been saying from the beginning: it is stalking.

[Mithreal]

179. "I feel these individuals are continually breaking the rules."

Agree completely and when the mods don't enforce the rules it irritates me even though I otherwise appreciate their efforts.

[Ignis]

206. I'm forced to agree.

Having moderated a few forums (and BBSs, for those old and geeky enough to remember them), I think the DU rules are very well written.

But the enforcement of those rules can be haphazard at times. And who can blame our overworked mods for that? :shrug:

I guess I don't have a solution to offer, but I do agree with your analysis of the problem. :hi:

[Jennicut]

127. Its a message board. I could care less at times what strangers say about me

or think about me. I believe what I want to and no one is taking that away by using some "words" on a message board.

[woo me with science]

156. You are obviously

an adult.

[Jennicut]

269. I try. I have a 4 year old, 5 year old, a husband, and a cat.

Someone has to be the adult in my life.

[trotsky]

298. Doubleplus1

LOL. Welcome to the Internet, kids.

[Hidden Stillness]

128. I am Totally Sick of It, Too; It is Killing the Website

I posted a reply on a thread last night about many more dead bodies of women being found at the Cleveland home of a known rapist, replying to someone who posted that the police got calls that there was something wrong, and did nothing. I mentioned how often there are cases of males who murder their wives, then it is "discovered" that the first one died similarly, too, but it was not even investigated. I then quoted a chilling comment from murderer Ted Bundy about male police Bundy dealt with: "They hate women as much as I do." This was a very serious comment about an outrageous issue. What happened? Two of the same small group of names popped up, attacked me, with spiteful, jeering, name-calling, and did not even address anything of the issue. I am sick of the way DU has never dealt with this. They have lost countless great women posters over the years, they do not do anything about really ugly male hate-attacks, as long as I have been here. I left DU a while ago for about a half-year because of this; I may leave it permanently. They never stop the really vicious male posters here, and I am totally sick of it.

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rudy23]

147. I think that's the idea. Why wouldn't the DLC want to wreck progressive sites?

It's cheap, relatively easy, and anonymous. We're their biggest obstacle to a corporate Democratic Party.

[John Q. Citizen]

230. Then we better get moving. I think we may be too late!

[Techn0Girl]

290. I think a LOT od sociopaths are misogynists as well...

My guess is that a lot of the immature anti-social types that like to flame and troll are, understandably, lifetime single people. And if they're men, they probably blame their inability in getting a partner on women as a whole rather than their own personal failings. So the result is that you see a LOT of internet flamers and trolls being generally hostile towards women.

[snooper2]

132. Wait a week...

You'll see this same thread posted again...

and the next week..


and the next week..


and the next week..


and the next month...


and the next year...

[nebenaube]

172. well, it is a honeypot... n\t

[slackmaster]

133. Sorry to have to steal your punch line, Cyrano...

I can’t wait to see how many bullies and/or cowards show up on this thread.

wow, I had now idea there were so many bullies and cowards on DU!

[dysfunctional press]

134. yeah that whole 'freedom of speech' stuff TOTALLY sucks.

"if you can't stand the heat...."

a) get out of the kitchen.
b) bitch and moan about the stove.

:nopity:

[uppityperson]

136. I appreciate the mods putting nasty posters on suspension. THANKS mods!

[Hoopla Phil]

143. K and R. You have a very valid

concern. There are some here who seem to revel in being as hurtful, contemptible, and insulting as possible. They are smart enough to push up to the edge of D.U. decorum without going over it but without a doubt are in violation of the spirit of the rules. I find it strange that such hateful (and yes it is hate) people would be allowed to stay.

[Hutzpa]

154. Try pointing it out and your

thread or post gets deleted or locked.

Go figures.

[jonnyblitz]

171. that idiotic piece of SHIT thread DESERVED to be locked

that made my fucking DAY. :applause: :thumbsup:

[MGKrebs]

149. DU, like rich foods, can be dangerous in large quantities.

Announcing the DU Diet! Restrict yourself to no more than 150 minutes per 5 day week. That's 30 minutes per day. Go nuts on the weekend.
And you will probably lose weight too!

[4_TN_TITANS]

151. I'll stop as soon as you give me your lunch money.... n/t

[woo me with science]

155. Instead of adults, we have victims.

I get tired of seeing DU discussed in schoolyard terminology, so that everyone is either a bully or a victim. There is good discourse on DU if you choose to find it, read it, or even participate. Nobody is forcing you to interact with anyone you dislike.

Part of being an adult is choosing where you want to interact and invest your energies. All this whining that others are mean to you is the result of your choosing to ignore the substantive responses you receive and invest energy in responses you could simply ignore.

The internet is an amazing place where everyone can come and be a part, but that also means you are thrown in with people you probably would not choose to socialize with if you were actually at a party, standing in the room. Just choose a different conversational partner. If you are incapable of ignoring a post on your own, use the "ignore" function, which has so generously been provided for you.

[HughMoran]

162. Best post of the thread

I like that concept - if you don't like mud on your feet, walk around the mud puddle. :think: :hi:

[LostInAnomie]

170. +1

I completely agree. DU is an internet forum. No one is forcing anyone to interact with anyone they find disagreeable. If people have not matured to the point that they have learned how to cope with disagreeable posts or posters, they should either: learn to use the tools the admins have provided to DUers to ignore said posters, or ask themselves why they are letting anonymous posters on an internet message board get to them.

Like you said though, some people are stuck in the schoolyard mentality where they are a victim and others are bullies.

[Kaleva]

193. A post that ought to be pinned at the top of every forum!

[blondeatlast]

256. My favorite DU toolsaren't DU features--my eyes, my brain, my fingers, and the scroll wheel. nt

[SidDithers]

264. +1...

Self control is the ultimate DU tool. :applause:

Sid

[MGKrebs]

261. So basically you are saying "it is what it is", and it can't get any better.

Analyzing our own collective behavior does no good. If the crackheads move in, the rest of us should just leave it to them.

To some extent, you are right. I think enterprising souls leave here from time to time and build their own neighborhood with different rules or just find others. But a lot of people care about this community and wish for it to be better. Is that so wrong?

[lumberjack_jeff]

164. Slow news day, apparently.

Isn't there something we can talk about besides how mean everyone is?

[Chemisse]

166. Maybe the rules should be tightened up

I had a problem with one person here who argued about everything relentlessly, and was sarcastic, demeaning, rude and smug about it. I use past tense because she is the one and only person I have put on ignore.

But what is interesting is that - looking at her journal - the posts she put in there, and apparently is the most proud of, are scathing, cruel put-downs of other people's opinions. The mean-spiritedness is absolutely chilling.

Someone who seems only to post for the purpose of arguing and insulting, and this is seen consistently over a period of time, should be warned once, then tombstoned.

[JFN1]

173. K&R because I'm with you on this.

It's way too easy to be mean when there are no consequences.

It is a simple thing for us to dehumanize each other while interacting online, due to the aforementioned lack of consequences for doing so.

Thank you for the sobering reminder that we all OWE each other the same respect we would give face-to-face.

:yourock:

[Geek_Girl]

175. It can be hurtful at first

But after awhile you grow a thick skin and end up ignoring the people that are being ugly.

[Stinky The Clown]

176. I observe that the names I expected to see in a thread like this seem to have missed their chance.

[Raine]

177. "Ignore" is your friend

for the sake of my blood pressure anyone who gets personally insulting with me gets put on "ignore". Luckily I only have couple there but it's sad that there is the need to do it at all.

[kaehele]

180. All of the above is life on the internet

and it occurs to me that for bullying to be a significant issue, one has to agree to be bullied.

[madokie]

182. Why you

are so right :-)
gotcha there for a second there didn't I

[NoPasaran]

183. I shit in your hat

[mrbarber]

186. Wait, there are jerks on the interwebs?!

WHO KNEW?!

[blondeatlast]

257. Speaking for myself, I'm devastated. I need to lie down...

...faint...

[alcibiades_mystery]

190. I hate bullies and cowards who call people names!

:rofl:

[Life Long Dem]

191. I'm sick of being sick.

[Kaleva]

194. Compared to many forums, DU is a well moderated, peaceful place.

It not the wild, wild, west that the old Howard Dean forum was.

[gleaner]

199. If you think it is the same group of people ....

Have you thought of compiling a list of poster names with remarks attributed to them? An OP in another thread made a list of all the names he/she had been called since they began posting here years ago. It was quite the list.

If you did the same, and posted it, you would take away a lot of their anonymity and expose what they are doing and how often. It may be a lame suggestion, but it is the best thing that I can think of to see who they are and if they are appearing at specific times to cover up information that might otherwise be pertinent to what is happening here and in the country at large.

[patrice]

203. I think this is an excellent idea. I have thought for sometime that in addition to Ignore,

and the Buddy List, there should be a Persons of Interest List.

[gleaner]

226. Thank you ...

In addition to the Persons of Interest List you could run a poll for everyone to vote in called "My Favorite Non Response" and then solicit the reasons for choosing it. Again, that would provide maximum exposure and a lot of feedback that a bully might not want to try to stand up to.

Bullies are basically cowards who hide behind bluster and belligerence or force of numbers. Stand up to them and they will generally back down.

[Doc Martin]

220. Great idea

[gleaner]

227. Thanks ... N/T

[MilesColtrane]

228. That is known as 'calling people out', and it is forbidden here.

If you can't bring yourself to Ignore someone then Alert and plead your case to the Mods.

If you still don't get any action, maybe you aren't really being bullied at all.

[Greyhound]

243. Perhaps ironically, that would be against the rules. n/t

[patrice]

200. That type of person is pathetic and weak. You'd think they'd be embarassed to display their

smallness, but, like the color-blind, I guess there are just folk who will remain forever ignorant of the true dimensions of strength, intelligence, and real superiority.

[Omaha Steve]

201. K&R!

[rudy23]

202. It's not so much the bullying I mind, as the intentional derailing of threads I see.

I also wouldn't have a problem with the bullying if it seemed genuine. I can take a good scrum on the internets, no problem. It's just that some are doing it with the obvious intention of derailing an argument, and knocking the substance of a thread so far down the page that no one really gets engaged in the thread.

[951-Riverside]

205. I hate the "popcorn" pricks

:popcorn:

[hmorehead]

209. OH YEAH!!! WELL COME OVER HERE AND SAY THAT!!!!!!

[alittlelark]

212. I've bullied ppl 3-4 times on DU.

In each case I was sure they were trolls (2 were tombstoned).... but I feel bad about each one.

2+ glasses of wine were involved each time.

I was bullied as a kid - perhaps I was trying to 'get back'.

Whatever the case, I have been good for over a year.


'ALERT' is the best option.

[20score]

213. Agreed. K&R

[greenbriar]

215. I have started keeping track of some of the nastier posts

and when I get enough, I might post them

[Warren Stupidity]

222. I hope your is on your list.

As it is pretty nasty.

[graywarrior]

217. Recommended.

[Doc Martin]

218. Respect for persons: Isn't this a progressive value?

Can't we oppose someone and even actively work to hold them accountable (e.g., George Bush on trial for war crimes) without attacking the person? It isn't easy. But tone is important. We can have a lot of conflict and disagreement which, no matter how mature anyone is, often does not feel good. We are human. I would not want to see us avoid conflict. Sometimes feelings will be hurt. I do want to see us stay away from the kind of hate talk practiced by those whom we oppose. Hate breeds hate.

[Warren Stupidity]

223. Happy to K & * nt.

[SidDithers]

265. Well played, sir...

:hi:

Sid

[Orsino]

224. That's the beauty, and also the ugliness, of the Internets.

It's not only a place to meet people. It's a place to meet the pieces of people they'd never share in person.

[undergroundpanther]

225. I get sick of them too.

In this thread I was repeatedly called a liar. And why? I dunno.
I guess someone didn't like me telling my own experices and voicing my concern about fanatics being threatening?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6912160

[PassingFair]

254. I saw that one, Panther.....the "I'm not buying it" response makes me angrier than any other offence

Especially when used against long time posters.

I was in a hurry to leave or a would have posted
in that thread. I'm sorry now that I didn't take
a minute before rushing out.

:hug:

[bridgit]

229. Well I mean it's all about the DU radar and being able to fly beneath it...

without having to flap a single, dingy little feather above it, yes? You know...like telling someone to "FUCK OFF" - in pig latin - very creative and 'demurely' scornful without any price to pay and how can *that* be wrong :thumbsup:

[mackerel]

231. Keyboard courage will always be with us.

As they say in Animal Farm, "All pigs are equal but some are more equal than others"



Can't you always press the alert button if you don't like a post?

[bridgit]

234. I think it's less-proper if you only *dislike* a post...

I've hit 'alert' maybe two times since 05 that I am able to recall (some really nasty, stupid, hurtful shit of course I'm made of rubber so...) because I was/am, apparently, able to be more free than some in that I understood well before I came here that people are in the shape, pretty much basically, that they want to be in; were it to be otherwise they would change :)

[Techn0Girl]

232. "they say things online that they would never say to someone’s face.."

You see that's where you're wrong.
Many, if not most of the people here who say such things here - also will say them in real life. The real consequences of their boorish behavior is that such people are shunned by almost everyone. You, I and most every other sane person just walks away from such people and doesn't go back. Hence they are isolated and a whole lot of them are on some sort of state or federal disability for some sort of mental (personality) disorder. So they have LOTS of time to post. Much more time then you or I have . In fact that's all they tend to do since they have no other place to go or people to communicate with. Hence they have a disproportionate voice on all but the most carefully moderated forums. They can be a crazy and uncivil and sociopathic as they wish - and we are all more or less forced to listen.

And that, in my opinion, is the great failing regarding the "unlimited freedom of expression" on the internet. The crazies have a disproportionately large voice among us simply because they have nothing else to do such as jobs, families and friends.

My idea would be for any forum to have a zero tolerance policy regarding uncivil behavior. Not just nice or non hate speech but true civil behavior expected from everybody. And that is something that anybody except the crazies could easily follow. We have what amounts to such a policy in all aspects of every day life. When someone acts out - they are socially ostracized and isolated and we have no problems with that in all other aspects of our everyday life. We should not have a problem with that on an internet forum.

[mackerel]

236. I disagree. I belong to another forum that makes this place

seem like it's peace and brotherhood day. What I've noticed is once those members meet other members in person they seem to chill considerably.

You have to consider that there is a whole psychological profile that comes with keyboard courage.

If you find a post offensive you really should press alert. The only way to curb that kind of behavior is to simply not engage and show no toleration.

[Techn0Girl]

247. I guess I'll have to disagree as well :)

I don't think ignoring a mental basket case deters them at all. I think the only effective way to get rid of the problem is to forcibly eject them from the conversation just like that are ejected from other social intercourse in real life. In my experience , ignoring a problem child never cures the problem. We'll have to agree to disagree :)

[1]

237. me too. mean people suck...

[saltpoint]

241. I'd just like to say that if somebody says something mean about Dolly Parton,

I'll kick the shit out of them.

[gtar100]

242. I hear you. It just shows how long of a way we have to go.

It takes more effort to be thoughtful, personal and honest. Snide remarks are just laziness. I love it when people are engaged in healthy debate and do not feel the need to rely on insults to make their point. That's the part that keeps me coming back to DU. The bullying and stupid bickering is, for the most part, just background noise. Though, probably best not to paint yourself into too much of a corner. Sometimes the right response to some comments is, "what an idiot". If a person isn't too wrapped up in their ego, that may very well break them out of their stupor and wake them up.

[MrModerate]

248. I understand the impulse to rage against the coarsening of public dialog . . .

That anonymity allows. But that's always been a feature of the Internet, and an important one. It's one of the things that gives the Internet such power. Unfortunately, people do let their inner asshole out when they think they can get away with it. It's the same thing when otherwise law-abiding people shoplift because they can.

I also think that it's getting worse. Certainly what passes for "serious" political discussion among "professionals" is only slightly elevated above the playground conversations of not too many years ago. Among amateurs like ourselves (by which I mean the only professional DUers are the founders and their staff) it's even coarser still, plus a lot of posters only have a partial selection of clues (and for some, none at all) to guide them.

I don't let it bother me much, however. If I get a drive-by insult, I just let it go, unless it's cleverly worded and gives me a thrill responding smarter-funnier-snarkier. That, too, is part of DU.

The other thing I do is stay out of forums I know I'll never be successful in, where the usual suspects and I are so completely at odds that a shit-fest is the *best* I can hope for.

Don't let it get you down. Remember that jerks, twits, twirps, and goniffs ultimately have to live within their own skins, and that's probably punishment enough for any infractions they may commit here. Also remember "Ignore."

[era veteran]

249. Getting called Nazi/ Fascist

On thread about soda being available on food stamps. Crap about new people is b. s. too. I pointed out hiding behind the anonymity of the internet IS cowardly. The various hillbilly/ stupid southerner thing might run off the progressive people who live in red states. I would rather be hit with a shovel than be called a Nazi. Peace, Richard

[Meldread]

250. It's not just the people you described.

It's the entire atmosphere of the site. I used to visit DU daily, and now sometimes I limit my visits to once a week. There is too much hostility, too much name calling, and in general an unwillingness to discuss issues. I won't pretend that I haven't played a role in any of these things in the past - I have. I've said and done things that I regret now, in retrospect.

I'm going to assume that most of the hostility comes from people feeling wounded. They feel that one side or group has attacked them, and thus they want to give back as good as they got... and unfortunately it has resulted in a circular firing squad where each side attempts to take retribution for past deeds.

If there was another site similar to DU, but more heavily moderated I would migrate there in a heartbeat. DU used to be my homepage, but not anymore.

[Echo In Light]

275. +1 (I sorta consider DU the true ideological battleground between liberal/conservative America)

[Hubert Flottz]

251. I try not to overreact to the

over reactors.

[zanne]

252. I think profiles should be mandatory.

DU's lax rules on anonymity let the hatred grow; nobody ever has to "own" anything they say.

[DailyGrind51]

253. It's going to happen no matter where you post.

[goclark]

258. Thank You ~ bullie is the word

It seems to me that if these posters are put on alert often enough, at least they would get a warning.

Does that ever happen?

It is insulting in today's society.

Sometimes I wonder if DU stands for " Devil's Underground."

A Discussion Forum should be just that ~Discuss and RESPECT the other person's opinion enough that you intellectually assist them in seeing your viewpoint.

[BennyD]

260. I agree with you. Thanks for posting this.

[Ganja Ninja]

262. Yeah I've been noticing it too.

People that respond to posts with little or no point to contend and instead just hurl an insult at the poster. Some of them have less than 200 posts. There's a word for them. I believe it's called disrupter.

[Echo In Light]

273. Hmm..I dunno - the ones who often fit that description have 1000+ posts

[Techn0Girl]

292. Many time the most prolific users....

... are the ones with nothing else in their lives. No jobs. No friends. No family.
And unfortunately no social skills at best or a history of personality disorder at worst.
That's my theory why some of the most prolific posters are the worst offenders.

[Ganja Ninja]

297. Oh do go on.

:eyes:

[123m456h789d]

266. bullies and cowards

Just like you can complain so can bullies and coward. Who made you GOD of DU.
Please, that what we like about blogs. Everyone have a chance to blog what they think good or bad. If you take that away what will happen to the blogger world. If you can't stand the heat, Well you know the next lines. Blogs was invented for the crazy and the sane to entertain each other.

[MNDemNY]

270. Boo-hoo.

Yup it's a quit whining post! fer fuck sakes, it's a goddamned message board, grow some skin or go play elsewhere.

[LatteLibertine]

271. I try

to treat others as I wish to be treated. The internet does encourage some to drop their more polite filters and be rude. Often that's because of anonymity and few to zero consequences. Like power, behavior on the internet often offers clues towards revealing a person's true character.

99% of the time I ignore or don't engage folks that are out to be intentionally rude or troll. Don't let the e-thugs get to you. Many confuse being arrogant and/or rude with strength/confidence. Most of 'em are remarkably insecure too.

[Cyrano]

293. Thanks for your input. Your post indicates that you really "get it."

[Butch350]

272. “Quit Whining”

[WilliamPitt]

274. You know my name.

:toast:

[Cyrano]

296. Yep. And I appreciate your appreciation.

[hfojvt]

276. kind of a funny contradiction there

You say people are bullies on line, but also at the same time cowards, because if they said those things to someone in the room, they might get punched. But then what is the person who does the punching? Aren't they a bully who typically intimidates people into not telling them things they don't want to hear?

[Echo In Light]

281. You've described a potential reaction from someone who'd been verbally assaulted

Which is not the same thing, per one's motive and intent, as a bully. Bully's are the ones who seek to intimidate and abuse others, so that term doesn't apply to the scenario you outlined, which is someone who reacts/responds to a bully.

[hfojvt]

294. maybe or maybe not

sometimes people who are verbally assaulted just turn tail and mutter "what a jerk" as they make their exit. It is just as easy to imagine some blowhard shooting off his mouth and then threatening anyone who called them on their lies or absurdities. Otherwise most people are probably gonna fire back verbally to a verbal assault. "FU2" is gonna fly before fists do. Seems to me that somebody who strikes or threatens to strike is probably a bit of a bully themselves with an attitude of "I cannot prove you wrong, but I can knock you around".

[Cyrano]

295. I have to agree with you.

However, when I was a teenager, I once reacted with a fist.

It's not something I'm proud of and I still regret it. My regret is because I was facile with language, and there was really no need for a physical reaction.

Anyhow, the guy's friends beat the crap out of me. But even if I'd known those consequences in advance, I probably would have still done exactly the same thing. Emotion is a more instantaneous reaction than thoughtfulness. And we are all occasional victims of it.

[ThisThreadIsSatire]

280. K&R and thank you... n/t