Is it just me, or is there a lot of disrespect for other posters on DU?

[Cant trust em]

Seems like there is a lot of urge to blow people off by calling them a chearleader or an Obamabasher, siding with the repukes, acting DLC, or what have you. I really enjoy coming on here to see the variety of thoughts and ideas. I may disagree with other posters, but I'm always going to assume that they are intelligent people who have a real set of concerns; even if they don't correlate with mine. I find it a little frustrating to see posters try to discredit someone else instead of engaging in real debate. This is a discussion board, isn't it?

[countingbluecars]

1. Yes.

It is getting old as far as I am concerned.

[BeFree]

2. Too personal

And there are rules against getting too personal.

Still, the "more war fans" are not very conducive to our cause.

[tridim]

9. ^ Perfect example of your point. nt

[BeFree]

12. I know, huh?

A twofer.

Thanks for not getting personal.

You could have something like: "You peace mongers are making it hard for us to get our war on."

[AspenRose]

22. And as you can see, pointing it out didn't do any good whatsoever....

Which tells me that those who want to be offensive will do so, no matter who is doing the calling for civility.

Instead of intending to hurt unknown internet people, they will continue to hurt the cause they're trying so hard to defend in the first place.

[tridim]

26. It almost seems like a reflex at this point.

Apparently they don't even know they're doing it.

That's kind of mind blowing.

[AspenRose]

29. Nah, they just don't give a shit.

[Bobbie Jo]

31. Perhaps they do know, but just don't care. nt

[Posteritatis]

107. The main problem is that one can't get punched in the head through TCP/IP

If that was addressed back when they were setting the medium up there'd be rather fewer assholes on it.

Or helmet sales would be booming.

[Tim01]

38. Ha ha! Wow. Right from the horses mouth. nt

[BeFree]

42. Yeah

Notice all the nasty replies? Easy to draw them out, dontchathink?

[POAS]

3. Is? Was? a discussion boaed.... Time will tell but

to answer your question, no it's not just you!

[groovedaddy]

4. It's not just you. n.t

[myrna minx]

5. While there was never a halcyon age here on DU,

I rarely post anymore because the bile from every direction is rather unpleasant.

[goclark]

95. I feel the same way

There is no room for discussion ~ it's only those against the Democrats and those of us that believe that we can help our elected officials by helping them to see that we care passionately about their view or we don't.

Instead,those of us that support our leaders and let them know when we disagree with them are called names and endure put downs.

This is no longer DU in my view.
Rarely room here for Discussion

[LooseWilly]

118. I think your post exposes a fundamental difference of perception at the root of the "incivility".

The perspective illustrated by your statement: "...it's only those against the Democrats and those of us that believe that we can help our elected officials ..." is demonstrative of a fundamental difference of perspective. The judgement & labelling of many as being "those against the Democrats" is offensive to many who post here. It implicitly suggests that criticisms of actions/policies of "our elected officials" is somehow "against the Democrats", rather than - criticism. The choice of words clearly suggests that, rather than respecting the opinions of those (of us) who believe that criticism will, in fact, "help our elected officials" (as officials who do things that please constituents tend to get re-elected... it is the whole point of having representatives, rather than just appointing people to tell us what to do) you and your fellow believers in "help<ing> our elected officials" have judged us to simply be "against Democrats". As if to say that we simply aren't "critiquing correctly".

As long as those who seem to approach issues from the perspective that the focus should be to "help our elected officials" continue to deem the rest of us (those who approach issues from the perspective that the "officials" are actually "representatives", who should "represent" constituents- us) ... as "against Democrats", and vice versa... we will all be hard put to be civil.

[goclark]

137. Huum

"Obama = Bush Lite"

That is way beyond the pale.

[LooseWilly]

142. That is way beyond the pale only if loyalty is the underlying definition of "the pale".

In my opinion a spot of mild hyperbole.

If Obama weren't continuing such things as aspects of the Patriot act, or unwilling to even consider an independent investigation into potential crimes (including war crimes) of Bush administration officials, or willing to put off such things as his campaign promises to repeal DOMA & DADT (apparently in the name of political expedience, presumably under the assumption that not moving on this would make moderates and conservatives less energized to oppose health care reforms, for example, but apparently to no effect), or... a number of other policy decisions that appear to be uninterested in even throwing a proverbial bone to the liberals of the party which aren't coming to mind with a minute's consideration... then such a label might be legitimately judgeable as "beyond the pale". As it stands however, many of us on the left see little difference between Obama policies and GHW Bush policies... which makes the term "Bush Lite" a reasonable, if mildly hyperbolic, label.

What seems to be a preconception on the part of those who share your point of view, namely that Loyalty is the first and foremost prerequisite for judgement of one's opinions as "reasonable", is not a preconception that those who are willing to criticize party members based upon policy, and only willing to give Loyalty to those who earn it by fighting for "good policy", are willing to acknowledge as a preconception.

I'd be curious to hear a policy discussion that explains how Obama's policies thus far are terribly different than policies of GHW Bush (whom I think most who use the term "Bush Lite" would probably agree qualifies as... "Bush Lite")...

[HughMoran]

6. The inflammatory rhetoric serves to obfuscate discussion

If you can make your "opponent" angry, then you have "won". :eyes:

It's absurd...

[DrDan]

32. and you would never consider insulting others, would you . . .

[HughMoran]

100. I do it

& have been insulted by you several times - what of it?

I never said that I didn't do it, nor have I ever claimed to be better than anybody else here.

It is possible to make a point without personalizing it - you should try it sometime (see, now that's a dig! ;)

[DrDan]

103. it is often hard not to take the comments (and insults) personally -

particularly when there are those that "twist" the words of others in an attempt to make a point.

[HughMoran]

111. On this we are in agreement - 100%

It always comes down to who is going to blink first; I think many of us have a lot more in common than we think - if we could just get past the snark.

[DrDan]

116. yeah - but the snark is often half the fun

[HughMoran]

117. AHA!

:rofl:

[DrDan]

123. for others, obviously . . . I hate it myself

[cbdo2007]

7. This isn't really a new thing. But it's sad because it scares a lot of people off.

That's typically the response though from people who dont have a good argument for something.

What's easier, explaining in a paragraph your opinion or simply calling them a "troll" or a "freeper".

[The Straight Story]

8. Some people just can't elucidate their points without attacking others

Easier at times (and yeah, we have all done it - but some seem to use that tactic/method on a regular basis).

[Vinca]

10. I've noticed that, too. I'm having to restrain myself from calling

some posters out as the assholes they have become.

[izzybeans]

11. It's not just you. I use DU as a news aggregator.

I have rarely had a fruitful debate with someone I disagree with on here. The admins do a fabulous job of setting a fair playing field, but...'tis the nature of the internet. The web-dogs tend towards crapping in their own pen. The rules of debate are set here to limit the flamefests and provide space for mutual discussion among Democrats. The admins can not avoid the fact that there are many of us Democrats who are assholes.

[kentuck]

101. I know I am.

:-)

[AspenRose]

13. SHUT THE FUCK UP!

I'm kidding. :hug:

It's not just you. Perhaps taking DU breaks will help with the frustration...

[Caliman73]

34. Breaks are necessary

DU is a pretty decent place, but it can be intense and just downright nasty at times. Taking days off is a good strategy for avoiding "hostility overload".

[Maraya1969]

14. I remember a forum on Delphi called "The Opinion forum". Everyone was mean,

name calling, disrespectful, childish. I came here and thought things were different but now they are becoming just like that other forum.

I might just starting saying, "rude ignore" on posts that attack me. There is no point in arguing what they say although it is very tempting. But to argue back just encourages them.

Maybe if we all just start ignoring them they will go away, or at least learn to speak like adults.

[ZombieHorde]

15. It is not just you. K&R

[Whisp]

16. In old timey DU there was a common enemy - Bush

and I think most everyone agreed to that. Anyone with a slight odor of defending anything Repub or Bush was given the special 2 for 1 with 4 toppings in record time.

Now it seems there is no common enemy except for Obama and freeper like insults against him stand without much interference by the Mods. Very few posts critical of Obama are done so in an intelligent and thought out manner - the few that do appear are very well worth reading. Too many are just 'obama is bush!! obama suxors!! obama is a corporate whore!!.

The quality of dialogue has degraded considerably overall I think - I first came here to learn now I'm just annoyed and pissed off and swear most of the time.

[dionysus]

108. i like how many now are actively, openly, against the democratic party in general

one guy even insinuated the majority of us here are progressive non-dems

[Number23]

136. Agreed. With this post and with the OP. Rec'd

[liberal N proud]

17. It's not your fathers DU

DU has changed and not for the better over the last year.

[CreekDog]

18. Is this your second day here?

:rofl:

of course you are correct. :pals:

[L. Coyote]

19. Is it just me, or are there a lot of posters on DU who have not earned any respect?

[Caliman73]

47. I think that it is the opposite.

A poster should be given respect until he or she loses it. If a person chooses to post things which are incorrect or offensive, then those things can be challenged in a way which is not overtly hostile. If they break the forum rules then they should be reported. I don't think that just because someone has not had a long history here or has had a large amount of posts, that they should be subject to disrespect until they have earned it.

Besides, I wonder, how does a person earn respect on a board with such varied points of view? You are sure to upset someone with your point of view and if it is one of the popular kids, that can spell disaster for you. I think basic respect should be granted from the start and reputation earned by the poster's arguments. I also think that it is the poster's responsibility to maintain respect by the way they state their arguments.

[AspenRose]

94. Very good

+1

[hfojvt]

50. perhaps disrespect should be earned and respect given automatically

I used to have an Asimov quote in my signature line, that I need to look up again. I think it says "It is no one's right to have contempt for another, it is only a hard won privilege earned from long experience." Yet it seems to be the other way around here. "You said something I strongle disagree with!!! You are a total a$$hole freeper scumbag troll!!!"

[omega minimo]

96. DU Rules are supposedly "based on respect."

[Posteritatis]

109. And what would qualify as earning it?

Specific ideological litmus tests? Handle? Post count?

[MH1]

20. There is a lot of disrespect for other people in American culture.

DU is just a manifestation of it. Slightly worse or slightly better, I'm not sure which, but not greatly different.

[Techn0Girl]

21. The more popular a board becomes...the more crazies it attracts...

People who are "live-at-homes" , people who are in half-way houses, people who have personality disorders, the terminally socially inept: all such people find havens on discussion boards where they are free to express behaviors that cause other people to walk away from them in real life.

You can't do anything about it other than heavily moderate civility which most board owners are loathe to do.

A thread of mine got locked because I advocated withholding the vote from ANY congressmen who support war but I can call you an asshole and get away with it scott free. It shows where the priorities are.

[Posteritatis]

110. Well isn't that impressively contemptuous of god only knows how many people... (nt)

[Techn0Girl]

115. Thanks for playing but you're on "ignore" now...

[Hatchling]

150. +100

[Cirque du So-What]

23. I have been insulted!

and on the internets of all places!

[Cleita]

24. I've noticed cycles.

In between wedge issues and elections, there are some really good and informative discussions. DUers are united and respectful of each other. During elections and political events like Congress now debating health care and wars being escalated, DU becomes a fight ring and the pit bulls get sorted out from the poodles, not to mention all the disruptors who come in at those times to stir the pot.

[drbtg1]

25. Well, as a dentist, I can tell you that dentists usually get treated like shit around here...

...in a way that's very prejudicial, very anti-liberal. And the admins do nothing.

So, to answer your question, yes, a lot of disrespect, often unwarranted.

[Cant trust em]

27. Anti-dentite sentiment is rabid around here. nt

[Techn0Girl]

28. Yes, but come one...no one likes dentists. It's warranted in that case.

I am not an AntiDentite but there is a book called "The Protocols of Molars" that really explains a lot about what those people are trying to do.

[Cant trust em]

30. I'm just referencing a Seinfeld episode.

I've never noticed it around here.

[DrDan]

I have been here for years - and do not remember ever seeing a thread on dentistry

[drbtg1]

40. I find that statement hard to believe.

Go ask PCIntern if you choose not to believe me.

[Techn0Girl]

41. Yes, the Dental Problem on DU has been a growing concern for all of us ...

I think it's time to put a cap on our feelings and offer a bridge of hope to all the DU dentists out there who feel unable to share in our crown of glory. We need to drill deep down in our collective DU hearts and stop needleing Dentists!

[DrDan]

56. I didn't say I did not believe you - I only said I have not seen any in my years here

[Techn0Girl]

60. Perhaps the poster mistook this for "Dental Underground" ?

[DrDan]

68. well, I for one, will be offering beaucoup respect next time I jump into the middle of a dental

discussion.

No insults or offensive comments will come from me.

[Techn0Girl]

72. It's the warmongering, Hillary-supporting dentists who wont go for a public optin that are the worst

Getting them to come around is like pulling teeth!

[DrDan]

84. they just don't appreciate the cavity of the situation

[Hatchling]

151. Just can't give up the primaries, can you?

:thumbsdown:

Even as a "joke" this is offensive.

[Techn0Girl]

159. Gee... didn't mean to hit a nerve or anything

[drbtg1]

71. I know you think that you're being funny, but look back at your posts here.

Ultimately, the only thing you've really done is prove the OP correct.

[drbtg1]

36. Thanks for proving my point.

n/t

[Techn0Girl]

37. But.... some of my best friends are dentists !

[drbtg1]

48. Har de har har

"Protocol of Molars"? Ok, I think I just got it

[tonysam]

61. Yeah, I think all dentists are like convicted murderer Bart Corbin

It'll be a cold day in hell I will let one around MY mouth. I'll just yank my teeth myself.

:sarcasm:

[mistertrickster]

129. Yup, the Drs. that aren't "real Drs."--that's BS. When you need one,

they are a godsend.

[TicketyBoo]

138. Just a word of encouragement…

I love my dentist. And his father, who was also my dentist.

[snooper2]

156. be glad your not a police officer

:)

[drbtg1]

161. I have a great deal of respect for police officiers...

...and you have my condolences if there is an overabundance of anti-police officier threads at DU (some of which, I believe, I noticed).

[havocmom]

33. Of greater concern (to me, at least) is the disrespect for logic that is rampant.

[Techn0Girl]

35. If it's a choice between disrespecting people or logic than I opt for the latter

[kentuck]

39. Respect for the moderates' positions.

It seems to me that the liberals in the Party have deferred to the moderates much more than moderates have deferred to the liberals. There is no evidence that the majority of our Party are "moderates". Yet, for political expediency mostly, the liberals have gone along to get along.

But history does not show any evidence that moderates have accomplished very much in times of stress or national emergency. The same applies to both political Parties. It was extreme right wing that drove military spending and the deficits sky high, even as they were giving taxcuts to their friends.

FDR and LBJ did not ask for the moderates input when they passed progressive legislation that was needed at the time. Because they knew that moderates are not capable of passing legislation for the people. They stand in the middle of the road looking for compromise. In the end, they usually get run over. That is the history of moderates in both Parties.

And that is what is handicapping the Democratic Party right now. They are frozen in the middle of the road. The moderates are in control at the wrong time in history. We need progressive change after the last eight years. Unfortunately, it is not on the horizon.


..

[Romulox]

43. Sorry, but all opinions are NOT equally valid. Rightwing ideology gets no respect from me

Even if you call yourself a "progressive" while spouting it.

[Techn0Girl]

46. The idea may not deserve a modicum of respect but the person should...

Because what may or may not be"right wing" is a matter of opinion.

[Romulox]

55. Nope. Rightwingers don't get to spout rightwing ideology unchallenged

based on some twisted notion of decorum.

"Because what may or may not be"right wing" is a matter of opinion."

Nonsense. What is or is not right wing can be determined based on international consensus.

For example, our war on drugs and for-profit prisons are right wing and authoritarian based international norms. Any putative "progressive" who supports such thing is objectively promoting right wing ideology, and deserves no respect on the basis of their subterfuge. :hi:

[Techn0Girl]

63. Well that's your opinion and I will have to respectfullly strongly disagree....

One person does not get to choose what he things are right wing ideas and thus who does "not deserve" respect.

We either all act civilly to each other or we end up in an anarchy run by a very few.

Neither you nor anyone else gets to decide who does or does not deserve respect based on your own personal interpretation.

[Romulox]

75. You are absolutely incorrect. One person (me) does indeed get to choose what I think is rightwing

and therefore does not deserve respect. After all, who can stop me? :eyes:

"Neither you nor anyone else gets to decide who does or does not deserve respect based on your own personal interpretation."

You just couldn't be more wrong. Not only does everyone indeed get to decide this for themselves (with, as I mentioned, reference to objective criteria, however,) but, more pointedly, you have just announced your own judgment in the very matter we have been discussing, buttressed with nothing more than your own opinion. :hi:

[Techn0Girl]

78. "After all who can stop me"

And that really is what most adults here are discussing I believe

[Romulox]

85. LOLs. Does your "modicum" of respect including insinuating that those who dare disagree

with you might not be included in the category "most adults"? :rofl:

Are you merely advocating for a bit more subtlety in our snideness? Because that is something I can get behind!

[Posteritatis]

114. But you just said what's "rightwing" is objectively determined through international concensus

So if your opinion of it differs from that on one issue or another, and I absolutely guarantee that it will at points, then who wins? Which is it?

[Romulox]

120. No, read it more carefully. I said "with reference to" objective criteria.

Not "objectively determined through international concensus" (sic).

These are two very different propositions. :hi:

[Echo In Light]

58. Perhaps only "matter of opinion" for those unfamiliar w/what their views actually represent

[Echo In Light]

49. ESPECIALLY if

:thumbsup:

[Individualist]

54. +1

I have no respect for neocons or neocon enabling DLCers.

[Caliman73]

59. You can argue against an ideology without resorting to insulting the poster though.

It can be difficult when emotions are stoked, but RW ideology usually is pretty easy to argue against because it tends to be very simplistic. You are probably not going to convince the person espousing the beliefs but you can put the information out there and let people make an informed decision.

[Echo In Light]

65. Absolutely agreed! The problem is, if I accurately cast another's views as rightward, they'll use it

... as 'justification' to become very snide, and to name-call, even though there wasn't that intention - to bring the interaction down to that level. I suspect many Dems are very conservative people who are conflicted about how they frame and define themselves for cosmetic purposes.

[Caliman73]

82. At that point, they have lost the argument and you can move on

It is when you get down in the mud with the person that it gets ugly. Noting a recent ejection from the board of a poster who regularly engaged in name calling and other tactics designed, not to argue points, but merely to incite argument, I saw that this poster was credited for taking down many posters who engaged in the mudslinging. As I said, the argument should stand on its merit without having to get in the mud to battle.

[Echo In Light]

93. Those types are easily avoided - just watch for overt refutation of anything remotely conspiratorial

... especially re the Gore/Bush "election" (installation)

[Techn0Girl]

67. You can IF you have even the most minimal intellectual capacity for reasoned discussion...

'Nuff said.

[Caliman73]

83. But then why engage with someone who does not?

People who do not have the capacity for reasoned discussion are usually very easy to spot and aren't worth the effort of debating.

[Romulox]

80. If that poster's entire raison d'etre is to promote said ideology, then the distinction means little

For example, this board has a couple of posters whose sole issue is the promotion of "free trade". Both they and their detractors assume that any critique of the ideology these posters espouse is the equivalent of a critique of that posters underlying morality. In such a case, pussyfooting around the issue becomes pointless.

A quote from my favorite movie suggests itself:

We are men of the world. Lies do not become us.

[Caliman73]

91. Again, I agree with you

As I said in my response above this sub thread, people whose world view is so skewed are easy to point out. You can put out the alternative view and move on.

I believe that the quote is from the Princess Bride. I love that movie.

[Romulox]

104. Right on all counts! nt

[dionysus]

112. but to you, anything to the right of chairman mao is "RW"

[Romulox]

121. A banned poster once told me that I said "Anyone with over $1000 in the bank is a 'class traitor'"

That's the kind of red-meat flamebait you'll need to provide if you aim to fill the void. :hi:

[dionysus]

125. i only have 68.37 in the bank so you ain't got nuthin on me!

:)

[treestar]

44. Yes.

It's also evil to "work on Wall Street" :wtf: Tens of thousands work there - janitors, secretaries, gophers, lower level professionals.

[tammywammy]

53. No, it's evil to work for a corporation

But a single person can incorporate. lol

[Romulox]

86. Any reason why we should have specific sympathy for janitors working on Wall Street?

Any more than you have for, say, manufacturing workers in the Rust Belt? :silly:

[lamp_shade]

45. It's not you. Most of the insults I see are done with no forethought and for absolutely no reason.

[KG]

51. your concern is noted.

:P

[jotsy]

52. I see a lot of snappy sass!

I try to have rules about communication in general and that it be CONSTRUCTIVE when things get adversarial, if what I'm going to say isn't constructive, it shouldn't be said. That way I guess attacking characterizations and put downs are out of bounds going in. I stick to stating my position as part and parcel to my point of view and remember the other person is as entitled.

I am disappointed when I see threads filled with comments from people who are more interested in trying to make others feel inadequate or down right stupid than contributing to civil conversation. It's just not what I expect from grown ups who gather from distant and diverse stations to discuss matters of the moment, and what we think they mean.

And then it recently comes to light that people are actually paid to come to places like DU and create animosity with the same tactics middle school cliques employ. It's a bummer I can't just come here and expect what I'm getting is at face value. I'm too much of a tootsie pop to survive such duplicity.

[tonysam]

57. Is there really nothing going on in the world?

Yesterday there was all of this nonsense about "intellectual dishonesty," and today it is "disrespect." Sheesh.

[berni_mccoy]

62. When I point out that an anti-war argument is flawed and get called a Warmonger for it

yeah, there is a lot of disrespect for posters on DU.

[Cant trust em]

69. Warmonger is a great example. nt

[Techn0Girl]

70. Well if you promote war ... that IS an accurate description. It truly is...

It is an emotionally charged one to be sure but accurate : one who is selling war or the idea of war.

[berni_mccoy]

73. How is refuting an anti-war argument the promotion of war?

That's like saying Obama = Hitler is wrong. You don't have to be an Obama supporter to refute the dishonesty of that.

[Techn0Girl]

74. It's not. I didn't say that. Promoting war is not refuting an anti-war argument

[berni_mccoy]

76. OK, I just wanted to be clear on that. Because I have been called a warmonger for such.

[zorahopkins]

97. Saying Obama = Hitler Is Just WRONG!

It's just wrong to say that Obama = Hitler.

But I do appreciate your point of view on this subject that concerns us all very much, and I want you to know that your opinion is important to me.

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and feelings on this matter as we look forward, while honoring our past. The rich diversity is something we all can honor and embrace because it makes us stronger during this difficult and trying time.

[Cant trust em]

88. That may be true, but it certainly doesn't seek to increase understanding

or to get more in-depth to the issue. It's just used to discredit and avoid the discussion.

I actually object to using loaded words in discussions. While "warmonger" is a technically accurate description, I think it does go over the top and doesn't usually reflect someone's true intentions.

[QC]

64. Most of the ugliness here is the work of a relatively small group of posters.

Why they are allowed to bully and attack 24/7 is one of life's abiding mysteries.

[damntexdem]

66. What respect for other posters on DU?

Naw, it'll never happen. ;-)

[Martin Eden]

77. Th anonymity of the internet is a license for being rude ...

,,, and a shield for cowards who wouldn't dare be so uncivil to someone's face.

And it's a feedback loop -- incivility begets incivility. It's difficult to refrain from dishing it out after being on the receiving end, so let's keep in mind that the person who remains polite and is intellectually honest is the person who almost always wins the argument.

[Echo In Light]

81. The bigger one's mouth online, chances are the greater the coward in real life

[peacetalksforall]

79. I think a distinction between bashing and running and bashing and supporting a

position should be made. With variations in between.

The first person to reply to a basher and runner should recognize that attack by writing only three words - "Bash and run?". The basher should then be ignored by everyone. If they re-enter with content and no bashing, we have dialogue.

Facts and opinions have worked for years. But we were more together against what was happening to us. Now we have different positions on going forward. And we've been infiltrated, big time. Probably with intent to take us down.

[NutmegYankee]

87. There is quite a lot.

I don't care if you disagree with me, but can we discuss it without accusations of right-wing ideology and such? Often we are both arguing a liberal opinion, only differing in it's intensity.

[TorchTheWitch]

89. Been going on for years

Where have you been?

[zorahopkins]

90. I Appreciate Your Thoughts On This Vital Issue

Thank you for taking the time to share your views. Your views on this issue are very important to me.

Together, we can strive to discover a better way -- a way that honors the past, but looks to the future. Together, we can appreciate the great diversity that is this community.

I appreciate your concern.

[lpbk2713]

92. You didn't really things would change for the better when OMC left did you?

DU was that way before he got here and, alas, I'm sure
it will continue along the same lines in the future.

[Cant trust em]

102. Who is OMC? nt

[rocktivity]

98. Niether.

It's that we have a lot of disrespect for just you!


rocktivity

(Ooops--was THAT disrespectful?)

[salguine]

99. I have nothing but respect for people who can disagree with me using logic and

reasoned counter-arguments. Who, if they think I'm wrong, can elaborate on WHY they think I'm wrong.

However, I have no patience anymore with people who can't do that. If I write a long, well-thought out post that might criticize the President, and present my argument clearly, coherently and rationally, and some moron responds with "FAIL", they go straight to the Ignore list. If the words "freeper" "troll" or, especially, "pony" pop up in their response, Ignore list. My ignore list has swollen to once-unimaginable size.

[kentuck]

105. Perhaps I should try that?

I have never put anyone on "ignore".

I apologize if anyone has been offended by my words. Need I say that none of my comments were meant to reflect personally on anyone here.

I respect your opinion.







...

[Posteritatis]

113. I generally don't consider them worth the effort of ignoring

Otherwise I'd block most of the site and see entire threads of "Ignored User" or something. Even folks I consider generally useless here will occasionally say something worth reading, and when they aren't it helps to have the context of who's saying what when I see other people getting particularly unhinged or whatnot at someone. About the only people I really consider ignoring are the ones who PM threats.

("Pony?" I must have missed the context for that one?)

[Hatchling]

152. I had a bunch of people on ignore in the primaries.

But soon after Obama won, I slowly let every one off the ignore list. Of course a lot of them were tomb stoned anyway.

Now I only use it if someone has gotten me riled up and then that'
s just to give me a time out from the offending person.

[thesquanderer]

106. True, but can't change it

Yes, it's hard to post anything at all controversial without being called names (freeper, puma, troll, etc.) or having motives question ("you must be a..." stockholder, employee, male ;-) or whatever). Conservatives don't have the monopoly on being close-minded, judgmental, intolerant, or rude. Personally, I don't even like seeing the *other* side name-called (i.e. repukes). But this is a site for everyone, not just people capable of or interested in civil discussion, unfortunately. If there were such a site, I'd rather be there!

[newtothegame]

119. There's an awful lot of quiet desperation on DU that I don't see on other blog sites. n/t

[Iggo]

122. Yes.

It's just you.

[L0oniX]

124. ...---...

[mistertrickster]

126. Damn right. Just because one disagrees doesn't mean that they support Sarah Palin and listen

to Rush Limbaugh.

Enough of questioning everybody's motives and intelligence just because they aren't in 100 percent agreement with the poster.

[Peacetrain]

127. The interesting thing, is when one side calls out the other for doing exactly the same thing they do

Its a real disconnect sometimes.

[debbierlus]

128. I am all for engaging in real debate, but you have to have a thick skin

Politics is a touchy subject.

[Cant trust em]

130. It's more about really talking about the issue

rather than just trying to fit someone into a box and thinking that you won the argument.

"You're opposed to the escalation in Afghanistan? Well, that's what Obama wanted from the beginning, so you probably would rather have John McCain in the White House."

It's that kind of logic that prompted this post. I've seen similar arguments made against those who support the president.

[QC]

131. The tone of this place should improve dramatically now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=142935

[RagAss]

132. errrrrr....We're Democrats.

[PeaceNikki]

133. Anyone who expects "respect" on the internet is bound to be disappointed.

[Techn0Girl]

146. Anyone who doesn't expect and demand a basic level of respect in all aspects of their ....

lives is bound to be treated as a child rather than an adult.

Just because I'm putting my thoughts into words instead of standing in front of you is no reason for me to call you an asshole.

It's entirely possible to require and moderate civility. All it takes is the will to do so.

[PeaceNikki]

147. um... I didn't call you an asshole. Go feign your shock elsewhere.

kthxbai

[Techn0Girl]

153. For someone who has "Peace" in their name you are remarkbly hostile....

I'm not sure what you saw in my message...but it certainly was not what I wrote.

[PeaceNikki]

154. See? You've now illustrated the absolute absurdity of your entire thread.

It's ok for you to call me "remarkbly (sic) hostile"?

People on DU seem to think it's only "uncivil", "hostile", "rude" when OTHER people do it.

It's laughable, really. Good day. Carry on.

[Techn0Girl]

155. Correction ... you WERE remarkably hostile. Now you're simply on ignore.

[PeaceNikki]

157. I SAID GOOD DAY!!

[Generic Other]

134. I figure I'll end up being banned for something I say eventually

In the old days, someone would just call me an asshole and leave it at that.

[barbtries]

135. i think

there's a lot of knee jerking going on. and probably many trolls. it's a shame, but i agree that the discourse on DU has - i don't know, slipped? i find myself spending more and more time at the mudflats.

everyone is so pissed off, and with good reason. but all of the issues still deserve some thought, and respect for others is really not that hard imo. anyhow. thanks for posting.

[Nikki Stone1]

139. Were you here during the primaries? This is nothing in comparison.

...

[Stinky The Clown]

140. It goes, it seems it me, back to the primaries.

And even people with NO favorite were mercilessly castigated and set upon by roving gangs. That's an exaggeration. But memories are long.

[politicasista]

141. Sometimes.

Have been feeling this way since Obama won the election and after he was inaugurated.

So in 2009, have been more of a lurker/reader than poster because don't want to come here just to get bullied or piled on.

Maybe it's better this way.

[gleaner]

143. Yeah ...

there are some piranha posters, but you can still have an intelligent discussion with reasonable and intelligent people. Just stand up to them and like most bullies they go away to prey on someone that doesn't stand up to them. Granted, it's not pleasant having to do that, but the good ideas and vital information you can find here more than outweighs the rabid few who want to spoil it for everyone.

[Cetacea]

144. Are you nuts? Are you off your meds? Are you stupid? Rightie?

Yes, I have noticed and find that I am visiting here less and less. I still love reading the ops, though.
Thanks.

[Raine]

145. Yes, I've noticed it too

I think it's due to a combination of things like political frustration and maybe even the time of year ... the holidays can cause such stress.

[pipi_k]

148. No different from any other place, really...

In fact, in comparison to some places I've seen, what goes on here is rather mild.


It does disturb me to see people attacking others with little or no provocation, but what can ya do...

:shrug:

[Javaman]

149. Nice post, Hitler.

Cheers! :)

[PeaceNikki]

158. A) "Disrespect" is in the eye of the beholder.

#2) DU consists of a lot of people who think it's ok for THEM to be rude, nasty, passive aggressive, snarky... but if someone else does it, bring on the fainting couch and smelling salts!!

It's comical. And it's THE FUCKING INTERNET. Jesus, you expect to be able to "demand respect" on the internet? Really? Newsflash... it's just not going to happen.

[LanternWaste]

160. I think that DU...

I think that DU, like the real world, has a small but vocal group of individuals who take a certain amount of pride in debasing other people through invective and incivility-- sometimes through outright rudeness, sometimes through implication.

These particular posters (I would put the count at less than twenty total) are little more than a DU version of the Sunday Morning Televangelist-- loud and boisterous, but ultimately seen as disingenuous and petulant. However, that same petulance can ofttimes be somewhat contagious until we take the measure to examine our own conscious for the same distempers.

I will be the first to admit that in the past, I'd allowed those two dozen or so posters to frustrate me-- but (and this may work for you as it did for me) in the end, I came to a realization that the pettiness, rudeness and petulance they directed at other posters for little to no reason may more often than not simply be illustrative of their own struggles, projected outwards. Once I came to that conclusion, it's been more sincere pity for them on my part than anything else.