So is DU being infiltrated by un-rec trolls who seek to influence our dialogue?

[Snarkoleptic]

And if so, do the mods track those who lurk and un-rec?
It seems like many discussion-worthy threads are aggressively un-rec'd even if they deal with subjects that one would imagine DU'ers would wish to discuss.

[EFerrari]

1. Sometimes it looks like someone is wandering around un-reccing everything.

It's a little odd, like having a poltergeist!

[HopeHoops]

2. I think it is one or two who just unrec EVERYTHING.

Just because they can.

[havocmom]

42. Thinkin one or two who are still pissed they didn't get Skinner to give in to their demands

;)

[EFerrari]

44. Well, now Skinner knows what it's like to have teenagers.

:silly:

[Warren Stupidity]

3. KUYASUTNT

[EFerrari]

6. I hope that doesn't mean something really important like, the Commies are coming or

who has the remote.

[sojourner]

27. oh no! you made me laugh and snort coffee out my nose!!!

[Warren Stupidity]

57. Its sort of late for coffee - must be west coast.

Kick and Unrecommend Yet Another Stupid Unrec Thread NT

[EFerrari]

67. Hey, sojourner! Good to see you.

:hi:

[sojourner]

84. hey you!!!

whatcha been up to? lots of activism is what i have been thinking. missed seeing you round....

:toast:

[QC]

4. They seek to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids. n/t

[cbayer]

21. That's just your wish, QC.

:rofl:

:hi:

[QC]

30. Howdy! n/t

[TexasObserver]

81. OMG, that was a funny film.

Timeless, too.

[MineralMan]

5. I unrecced this thread because I only unrec threads

about unrec. Go to the Greatest Page. It's full of good posts that have been recced onto that page.

This is not a good post, and it will never appear on the Greatest Page.

Unrec is here to stay. It has little or no effect, overall on posts destined for the Greatest Page.

[question everything]

14. How sad that so many have to go to the "great page" to see what others

are saying, instead of forming their own opinion.

Sounds more like free rep that a Democratic site.

[Gman]

7. Unrec

[Vickers]

8. K&U on principle. Take it up with Skinner.

:eyes:

I'm getting close to agreeing with a suggestion recently for an immediate ban on anyone complaining about a site feature.

[Snarkoleptic]

11. Not complaining about the feature here. Wondering about unrec trolls.

[Vickers]

13. Give me a list of Unrec trolls.

:eyes:

Look, your thread sucks, people are Unrec'ing it, get a fucking life.

[Snarkoleptic]

15. Just asking a question. Is this a problem?

[Vickers]

20. Not a problem... I also asked a question which thus far has not been answered.

Give me a list of Professional Unrec Trolls© and then I'll give your concern a little more weight.

I'm sure Skinner et al will be happy to provide you with a list of people who have Unrec'ed, say, 10 or more threads a day.

Wait...you HAVE voiced your concerns to TPTB, right?

:eyes:

[Snarkoleptic]

38. That's the nature of my OP.

Un-rec is anonymous and since DU'ers have been effective in alerting/TS'ing trolls, this may be their workaround.
As for my concerns, this thread is how I've chosen to voice them.

[Vickers]

41. Rec is ALSO anonymous...how do you feel about that?

Every time I hear the "anonymous" bullshit, I look up and down the thread and invariably I see plenty of people who have openly and candidly said why they Unrec'ed, so that line is bullshit.

Anyway, here is my IM to Skinner:

Subject:

Immediate 3 day suspension for people complaining about forum features

Message:

Hi Mr Skinner,

I'd like to suggest that people who complain about a forum feature in the forums be given a 3 day suspension if they have not voiced their concerns *specifically* in an IM to you.

I'm getting tired of all the "oh noes an unrec!" bullshit, particularly in the GD forum.

Kindest regards,

Vickers

[Snarkoleptic]

45. As I said, I'm all for the unrec. feature.

What I don't get is vigorous objection to my asking a simple question.
I mentioned upthread my musings over low-post-count heavy un-rec users.

After my OP, I spotted a thread entitled- 'Make no mistake: GOP is paying trolls to "Blog Attack"'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7111916&mesg_id=7111916

Is it wrong to wonder about this stuff?

[Vickers]

62. "low-post-count heavy un-rec users" How do you fucking KNOW?

I have a whole shitload of posts, I've been here a lot fucking longer than you, and I unrec stupid shit like this stupid fucking thread ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

How do you know it isn't people JUST LIKE ME unrec'ing this worthless shit ALL THE TIME???

:shrug:

Seriously, write a letter to Skinner and get some statistics, until then, stop the dumbass speculation.

[uppityperson]

50. calling Duers trolls IS against the rules.

[MissDeeds]

23. So only trolls can disagree with an op

and choose to unrec? The admins came up with the option, are they trolls too?

[question everything]

16. Wonderful. Let's have a list of what one may or may not say

before an immediate banning.

May I suggest that you do not belong in a Democratic site where freedom of expression has always been the hallmark of the ones who really call themselves Democrats?

[Vickers]

24. You consider Unrec'ing undemocratic?

Please lay out your argument on that, O Wise One!

:rofl:

I do consider harping about established DU features a ban-able offense, and will compose a letter to Skinner advocating thusly.

[laconicsax]

18. +1

[madrchsod]

9. been here long enough to know better.....but sometimes i do`t

[neverforget]

10. Who cares?

:shrug:

[question everything]

12. Not necessarily. There are some who, as a matter of principle

would un-rec everything that certain DUers post. They even say so.

Others would "wait" for others to un-rec before they join the herd.

Which is why I recommend everything - almost everything - that has "less than 0." In many cases these threads stay 0 or above.

The way I look at it - the un-rec is a sneaky way of bypassing DU rules of not going after other DUers. The way I look at it, if someone took the time and effort to post something, he should be treated with respect. And if I, and others, disagree, we can just ignore that post and let it sink. Or, we can have the decency to at least say why we disagree. But to un-rec anonymously is coward and lazy and, frankly, does not fit the spirit on which DU claims to operate.

[Vickers]

17. 'Which is why I recommend everything - almost everything - that has "less than 0." '

And that isn't abuse (as defined by you!) of the Rec/Unrec feature because...?

[Snarkoleptic]

33. I agree.

Your with you comment-
"The way I look at it, if someone took the time and effort to post something, he should be treated with respect. And if I, and others, disagree, we can just ignore that post and let it sink. Or, we can have the decency to at least say why we disagree. But to un-rec anonymously is coward and lazy and, frankly, does not fit the spirit on which DU claims to operate."

Seems like many don't want to look at this issue. As DU has gotten better at TS'ing trolls, maybe this is some form of workaround.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the un-rec feature, but back to my original thought, I wonder if there is there a correlation between low-post-count DU'r and heavy use of unrec?

[Ms. Toad]

64. What about all of the

"Rec this if you agree the crybaby should STFU!" threads that used to be prominently featured on the front page before those in the disfavored group had the option of voting against the thread. By your logic, isn't that just a sneaky way of bypassing DU rules of not going after other DUers?

Otherwise, your reasoning is faulty - threads sinking have nothing to do with the rec/unrec feature. They sink if no one cares enough to disucss them.

As to the rec/unrec -you get to vote on whether a thread should be on the front page of DU - or not. That is all the rec/unrec means - and people should have equal (anonymous if they choose) right to vote that a particular thread should be part of the front page of DU.

[Snarkoleptic]

19. And then I spot this thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7111916&mesg_id=7111916

[Sarah Ibarruri]

22. I'll bet Repukes are to blame for the anti-Obama promotion around here

And the majority of the unrecs.

[cbayer]

25. Actually, we are in on it.

Damn, I wasn't supposed to say that.

:hide:

[SidDithers]

34. Now you've gone and done it...

there will be tin-foil everywhere now. :)

Sid

[EFerrari]

35. UMMMMM!

lol

[uppityperson]

51. heh

[superduperfarleft]

26. So here's the daily thread about the vast right wing conspiracy

to unrec threads on Democratic Underground.

Oh yeah, and unrec.

[Posteritatis]

37. Daily? They're practically hourly. (nt)

[Kaleva]

28. Which discussion worthy threads have been aggressively unrec'ed?

And by what standard do you determine a thread to be discussion worthy?

[ashling]

29. The converrgence of "unrec" and "tinfoil"

is ugly

[ohheckyeah]

31. Oh for God's sake.

This whole rec/unrec discussion has gotten to the point of absurdity.

[Raine]

32. DU is full of people obsessed

with the unrecommend & recommend feature and the why of the obsession is what's a mystery to me. :shrug:

[Posteritatis]

36. They've lied to themselves to the point where they're convinced unrec is oppressive. (nt)

[EFerrari]

40. Why would you say "lie"? I think part of the deal is, we only have a very few

visual cues on the net compared to RL conversations. Maybe people are over-weighing the ones they do have.

[Posteritatis]

55. Because they're repeating demonstrably false statements. (nt)

[EFerrari]

59. Really? Which ones are those?

Whoosh, right over my head. lol

[Posteritatis]

75. There's several, but any that get within a lightyear of the word "censorship" rank highly. (nt)

[ashling]

39. What?

I can't hear you because of all the unrecs .... :puke:

get a life

[BanzaiBonnie]

43. It looks that way

[Fla_Democrat]

46. If so.....

it looks like they whupped up on this post... :evilgrin:

[Snarkoleptic]

48. Nah, the OP was unrec'd by those who wrongly thought I was against the unrec feature itself.

[mtnester]

83. Nah, we Unrecc'd because you are WHINING about unrecc

BTW, K&U for ANOTHER bemoaning of the evil unrecc

[SidDithers]

47. Yup, since around May 4, 2007...nt

Sid

[Kaleva]

49. This thread itself refutes the OPs arguement.

It's getting unrec'ed big time but is also getting numerous replies and views. No lack of discussion here despite the best efforts of the so-called unrec trolls.

[Snarkoleptic]

53. People are discussing this thread rather than doing a drive-by unrec.

The threads I wonder about are the solidly Democratic ones that get heavily unrec'd with little/no discussion.
I'm all for the unrec feature, but have read tales of paid RW bloggers who try to influence discussion.
Mebbe I'm cynical, but it seems naive to think that such activity doesn't go on here.
As I said upthread, DU is strong at rooting out disruptors, maybe the disruptors who can't handle dialogue have taken to using unrec.

[Kaleva]

63. If a thread has little to no discussion, it's probably just not that interesting to many here.

I haven't seen any evidence that the unrec feature stifles discussion.

[uppityperson]

52. How does unrec "influence our dialogue"? this thread has unrecs, yet I can still read and reply and

have dialogue. Of course, that is assuming that at least 1 DUer has not put me on ignore, but still, how does unrec change our dialogue?

[Kaleva]

54. It doesn't change the dialogue.

All unrec and rec do is determine if a thread makes it to the Greatest Page or not. The interest in the subject matter is what determines how much written intercourse a thread generates.

[EFerrari]

61. Well, that's what the feature was intended to do and it seems to work well.

But that isn't necessarily all it does or can do.

[Ms. Toad]

65. Ditto. n/t

[UTUSN]

56. I fergit: Have I UnrecKKKed THIS thread?!1 n/t

[Morning Dew]

58. K&U

Happy to unrec threads that complain about unrec.

[Canuckistanian]

60. I'm not concerned - the "unrekkers" don't seem to have much effect

It's not because they "unrec" important posts. It's just that they "unrec" EVERYTHING.

So, the only thing they really accomplish is to weed out the barely mediocre posts from the Greatest Page.

If something is good, we can easily rec it to the Greatest. Some of the most highly rec'ed posts started out being heavily unrec'ed.

There's not enough of "them" to really make a difference.

[snagglepuss]

68. I don't get the concern with unrec, its not like it erases the post. nt

[unkachuck]

66. I'm going to rec this thread, simply because I'm contrary....n/t

[notesdev]

73. Me 2

help help I'm being unrecced!

[MilesColtrane]

69. In reply:

No, and...

I doubt it. They've got better things to do.

And, unrec.

[yodoobo]

70. I dunno but I always unrec those who whine about unrec

It just a forum post.

Thats all it is.

The average housefly will outlive it.

[omega minimo]

71. Wait -- wasn't UnRec supposed to be a Troll deterrent?

[Kaleva]

74. To cut down the drive by recs of flame bait threads.

[juajen]

72. I don't know, but I don't like the un-rec button, so far. NT

[Lagomorph]

76. Another conspiracy?

Will wonders never cease....

[aikoaiko]

77. No.

[NYC Liberal]

78. I think posting has more influence on the dialogue

than an anonymous rec or unrec...

[saltpoint]

79. I feel virtually certain that the Duke lacrosse team is involved.

[TexasObserver]

80. un-rec

[defendandprotect]

82. k i c k