This message was self-deleted by its author

[eloydude]

This message was self-deleted by its author (eloydude) on Thu May 28, 2015, 11:08 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[With whom]

1. At least you did not provide a link to a post

that would list the Clinton supporters to ignore. There's one around here somewhere that resourceful members could find.

[eggplant]

21. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Tue May 26, 2015, 12:31 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

There are couple off my head...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=8726

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is just going too freaking far, i don't care who you follow. A newb with less than 3 weeks (although it would hold also for an old-timer) making a list of Hillary followers to put on ignore. Come on, man. This stuff is for private messages. I think du will implode way before the primary is this basically calling out is not squelched, especially when they can't even reply in the Bernie group. And I swear I'm a Bernie supporter! Ah!

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 26, 2015, 12:46 AM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This newbie obviously has no idea that call-outs are a no-no. I don't think the poster meant that the members they've named should be placed on ignore, judging by what they've said in their original OP, which made a lot of sense to me. Asking for a delete of that particular comment may serve a better purpose. For that reason, I say leave this post alone and then advise the inexperienced "newb" to either edit or delete the post. Hey, you could even do it in a private message!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Eh, whatever. This is the Bernie Group, after all.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Calling people out is uncivil, particularly for having the nerve to exercise their Democratic rights, something this poster obviously opposes.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the Alerter.. they need to get a grip.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I think everyone knows who supports whom here and we can make our own decisions whether or not to put someone on "ignore" for their choice. This post is pretty clearly a call-out and I think it should be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[KMOD]

23. Since I can't reply to the hidden post,

I have never posted anything negative about Senator Sanders. I have never said he did not have a chance. I have said he faces long odd, that's it.

I really don't appreciate that a few Bernie Sanders supporters are making hit lists, in an attempt to censor HRC supporters.

[Capt. Obvious]

24. Putting people on ignore is not censoring them

That option exists for a reason. I wish more people would avail themselves of it.

[merrily]

26. One supporter whose post got hidden. This forum is not for you, any more than the Hillary forum is

for me.

[delrem]

3. So, is it OK to discuss a politician's associations and source of income,

their past political actions, or not?
Is a politician's political past fair game for open discussion, or not?
What if those who favor a certain politician construe such discussion as, in a word, traitorous to the Dem Party? What if they construe such discussion as "ratfucking"?
What if that candidate is gearing up to rake in over $2billion just for campaigning, because that incredible sum advances the objectives of the donors? Is it OK to discuss that?

[RobertEarl]

4. I've been told

There are only about 8 HC supporters on DU!?!? Heh..

Latest DU polls show 90% for Bernie, so the 10% for HC are a minority and we should always treat minorities kindly.

We will never convert those 10% to post anything nice about Bernie, so what's the use?

Instead, we should concentrate on the Sander's message and refining it so that when we do meet someone who is on the fence we can convince them to vote Bernie.

IOW, have some pity on the poor HC supporters on DU? YMMV?

[brooklynite]

5. I find it intriguing...

...that polls showing consistent support for Clinton over time and consistently high popularity are discounted as irrelevant this far out, but ONE opt-in DU poll is the gold standard for the level of support Sanders enjoys here?

[hootinholler]

6. There haven't been many polls conducted since Bernie announced

Those that have, show significant gains. I suspect the trend will continue.

I suppose that the Harrow crowd could simply be ignoring the opt in DU polls (which have been posted basically weekly).

[RoccoR5955]

7. So can you please inform me

as to where these polls that include Bernie are? I haven't seen a one.
Granted, his support will be slow in general public polls right now, but once people get Bernie's message, and find out that he has no corporate support, that he is not being supported by billionaires, I believe his poll numbers will rise sharply, overtaking those of Mrs. Clinton in a large number.

[brooklynite]

9. Here...

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

and here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

[oneshooter]

22. Jury Results

On Tue May 26, 2015, 01:11 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

I find it intriguing...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=8774

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

this is group for bernie sanders not a place for hillary clintons supports can bash his supports on DU

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 26, 2015, 01:21 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Childish alert.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Simply stating a "intriguing" question.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seriously?
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This is inappropriate for the Bernie Group. Poster should put this in GD.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: We can get used to this I guess but I don't remember this sort of conduct in 2008

[RoccoR5955]

8. Well I must be a pariah..

Because I have already been banned from the Clinton group. It must have been something I said.
Oh well. Sorry about that.

[brooklynite]

10. I've never gone to the Clinton group...

...but my understanding is that Groups are support-sites, and negative posts in the Clinton group would be as appropriate as they would be if there was a Sanders group.

[RoccoR5955]

11. Even if they are bona-fide facts? n/t

[brooklynite]

12. Yes - even then

Take it up with Skinner. Open debate is possible in GD. Not in support Groups.

[L0oniX]

17. ..and yet here you are in the Bernie Sanders group ...posting. Imagine that.

[brooklynite]

19. Only reason I'm here is that I was referenced in the hidden message...

..and have said nothing negative abiut Bernie while here

[L0oniX]

20. You are not preemptively blocked even though we know your stance is my point.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Why would you want to go where you are not wanted and rile people up?

Would you do it in real life?

In the working class Jamaica , New york milieu in which I was raised we learned such activity carries physical danger.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. I see there was a calumny against me in a thread I wasn't even participating in

Yeah, it got a hide but three Democratic Underground members voted to let it stand.


I am sorely disappointed.

I would say a lot more but I don't want to afoul of the terms of agreement.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. I only came here...

I only came here because a friend of mine on DU sent me a link which included the calumny against me. Since this is a protected board I will respect that and not post here anymore except to address this calumny or other calumnies made here against me.


PEACE

[LWolf]

16. Being "nice" in a campaign...

probably the better word would be "civilized."

I'm fine with that. I don't have to call names, to attack HRC on personal grounds. I have always found it demeaning when fellow DUers call Republicans names, let alone other Democrats. I've always thought we ought not to operate at the gutter level of the opposition, and that mirroring what they do makes us hypocritical.

But to point out policy differences? That's wide open. It's her policies, along with her connections, that brand her a Third Wayer. It's not an attack to say so. Her supporters want to present her as the great liberal hope. That's going to need constant debunking.

I won't be starting any threads about HRC. I will, though, drop in to refute "talking points."

[L0oniX]

18. Everything is on the table except for personal attacks.

I've seen attacks on Bernie for his appearance,age and manors. That's personal. Attacks on Hillary's appearance, age and manors are personal. Both have no value anywhere. Everything else is fair game. Past mistakes, past policies, bad choices, associations, track records etc are valid.

[marym625]

25. We asked that this post be deleted

And eloydude agreed to do so.

Thank you