HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Flying Squirrel » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

Flying Squirrel

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Aug 20, 2010, 06:40 PM
Number of posts: 2,957

About Me

I am the same DU member who formerly posted under the name FlyingSquirrel (no space) on DU2. If you are reading this as the result of an alert: I have never once claimed that I will not vote for the Democratic nominee this November. Ask for a link and read carefully. :)

Journal Archives

Q: What do the following 46 DU'ers have in common?

2naSalit, alp227, annabanana, appal_jack, Arger68, Bibliovore, BlancheSplanchnik, bullwinkle428, calimary, Canuckistanian, Catherina, Cooley Hurd, Demo_Chris, Dragonfli, Fire Walk With Me, flamingdem, Flashmann, freshwest, fromVT, Hissyspit, hwmnbn, jeff47, Lugnut, me b zola, MH1, Mnemosyne, monmouth3, pacalo, PADemD, phantom power, pinboy3niner, ProfessionalLeftist, progressoid, raouldukelives, rbilick, ReRe, Rhiannon12866, riverbendviewgal, silverweb, StrictlyRockers, summerschild, tk2kewl, valerief, WillyT, Wilms, ybbor

A: During a 48-hour period preceding this post, they all recommended at least 7 of the same posts that I did (20% of the 35 total threads that I recommended over this two-day period.)

Now if there were only a DU function which could quickly and easily compile that stat for me (without identifying the actual DU'ers as I've done above) then recommend other threads for me to read based on other threads recommended by a majority (or some other percentage) of those same posters! That would be heaven.

If I was in a hurry and the list of posts generated was too long, maybe in the Options I could increase that to 30% of the same threads I had recommended. Or if I was planning on spending a few hours, drop it to 10%.

If I didn't visit DU that regularly, I could increase the search option to include recommendations for up to the past 7 days.

Whatcha think?

(Please Recommend if you think the idea warrants serious consideration... Thank you!)
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Wed Feb 13, 2013, 01:16 AM (57 replies)

Sorry for the multiple threads.. Skinner says they may be able to tweak the jury selection process

So that those of us who have stopped being selected have more opportunities to serve.

Posted by Flying Squirrel | Tue Feb 5, 2013, 05:48 PM (24 replies)

I have less confidence in the jury system now that I'm no longer part of it.

Anyone else having a similar experience? Before the change, I was serving on a jury every 2-7 days. My last jury service was December 24th. I have not been selected for a jury since then. I had a post hidden on January 13, well after the selection process changed; and my supposed 80 percent chance of serving on a jury is still double what it was before I bought a star, at which time I was serving on a jury at least once a week.

The jury process has changed. Who is now serving on them? I don't know anymore and it gives me less confidence in the system.
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Mon Feb 4, 2013, 07:44 PM (26 replies)

The Jury system needs serious overhaul.

It's the only reasonable conclusion I can possibly reach at this point. MIRT doesn't get the trolls fast enough, and many people are now purposely hiding under the radar so they can be allowed to vote on a jury. It's unconscionable and it's getting worse by the day, you can see it in the jury results more and more. The site cannot be self-policing, at least not the way things are going. Also - despite being on this site for hours a day (usually reading, not posting) I have not been on a jury ONCE since they changed the jury selection rules. It makes me wonder who IS being chosen to serve. Something needs to change soon or I will be outta here like last time I left over the Unrec function. (Not that my leaving will make the slightest impact on DU, of course, but there were many who left over that same disagreement and in total that DID affect DU.)

Edit: I was chosen to serve pretty often before I bought my star. Now? Not so much. Something weird is going on, maybe I'm paranoid but it almost seems like a hack of some sort.

Edit 2: Ok, maybe it doesn't need to go, but it does need to be overhauled.
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Mon Feb 4, 2013, 04:36 AM (54 replies)

Is there a Satire forum? (If not, how about making one?)

Perhaps in the "Offbeat" Topic forum. And we could start strongly suggesting to people who post Onion, Daily Currant etc. stuff as being real, to post them in that forum instead of GD.
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Sat Feb 2, 2013, 09:10 PM (10 replies)

It has been a source of personal pride for me that I put nobody on "Ignore"

But after seeing the PPR's lately, it seems apparent that Skinner has been taking into account the number of "star members ignoring" a DU'er when deciding to PPR them. If that's what it takes to get some of these long-time disruptors (or people who otherwise just seem to be on the wrong website) out of here, then that's what I'm gonna start doing.

There will always be a few left who can (and will) leave them off ignore and alert on their posts - and I thank those people for their service to DU. For my part, I'm going to start ignoring them.

Posted by Flying Squirrel | Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:22 AM (35 replies)

What can be done about failed Jury results on threads which make DU look bad?

This one for example

The above thread had at least 23 recs at one point

Here are a few suggestions:

(I opposed a blanket unrec function before and still oppose it)

1. A thread which has been alerted on and gets at least 2 votes to "HIDE IT" may be unrecommended by any DU'er.

2. Replace recs with thumbs up/thumbs down. Use thumbs up to determine placement on Greatest Page, but thumbs down is shown as well which would make it quick and easy to notice if there is a large percentage of DU who disagree with its placement on the GP.

3. An alert on an OP (whether successfully hidden or not) will trigger an automated PM to anyone who recommended the thread, letting them know that an alert had been placed and asking them to revisit the thread, and decide whether they want their recommendation to stay or want to undo their recommendation. (This is my favorite option of the first three that came to mind)

4. ???
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Mon Nov 26, 2012, 03:57 AM (16 replies)

Why did Admin change # of recs from 5 to 10 to reach Greatest Page?

Usually when they make changes to the site they'll post a thread explaining the reasoning but so far I've heard nothing. At first I didn't mind but sometimes it makes it easier than going thru all the latest threads (particularly on my phone.)

What's the general opinion here, like 10 recs? Liked 5? Don't care?
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Sun Nov 25, 2012, 06:33 AM (3 replies)

Hey...

When did the threshold jump to 10 recs to get on the greatest page? Not that I'm complaining..
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:39 PM (5 replies)

I was on a jury and never got back results.

Earlier today.. don't remember everything about it, it was a post by a DU'er who had been here since 2001(I think) with low post count, freaking out about all the election fraud/intimidation etc. The alerter was saying we needed to lock it cause it would depress turnout - some were calling the poster a troll, others were sympathetic. Anyone have a link to the post? Or know what happened? Would I not get an email if the post was simply deleted instead of hidden? I voted to leave it and said we didn't need to censor such posts and that they would drop on their own.
Posted by Flying Squirrel | Tue Nov 6, 2012, 07:05 PM (2 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »