Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I think the majority of issues with DU3 have a lot to do with unresolved issues on DU2

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 01:55 PM
Original message
I think the majority of issues with DU3 have a lot to do with unresolved issues on DU2
I've been reading most if not all of the threads about DU3 and the concerns people said they had. I've looked at the responses, too. If you're reading this you probably have as well, and you've also probably found it impossible to miss the tone and the subtext in it all.

I don't think this really has much to do with DU3. It seems to have a lot more to do with unresolved business about DU2 and the nature of DU in general.

Two simple points, which combined are causing a lot of frustration out there, IMO:

First, this website has an overwhelmingly liberal userbase. Classic, bleeding-heart (I say that as a compliment) liberal. Go look at the Greatest Page any day of the week if you doubt it. After years of reading DU, I think most of us are probably more liberal in our opinions than when we first came here. That's true for me, anyway. And that naturally causes a conflict with and criticism of President Obama and the Democratic Party in some circumstances. So there's already a source of friction there and it's not trivial.

Second, over the history of DU there have been a number of famously malignant personalities which seem to thrive on conflict with other users. Everyone knows their names and the list is long if you've been here a while. I don't mean people who simply have a differing viewpoint, I mean people who expend a great deal of energy to regularly inject themselves in unpleasant ways into discussions. And who clearly and openly relish the unpleasantness with which they do it. In my experience, it takes quite a few people to really promote a topic of discussion but just a few to stifle it, if they are determined enough.

Some very well-known users literally did this for years and years before being shown the door. Would it be controversial to assert that some of those types of personalities might still remain and that almost everyone would be familiar with their names and behavior- from regular readers of DU, to the moderators, to the Administrators?

We all read the same site, after all. We all see the same things.

Those two aspects have mixed together in some very unhealthy ways, which are also no secret to anyone: While there are many users here who legitimately agree with and defend the President and Party from criticism, it's easy to imagine how a malignant personality could find a goldmine in conflict and a safe harbor of sorts by propping themselves up as an uncivil, nasty "defender" of policies openly derided here for almost a decade during the Bush administration.

A foil against most of the userbase for maximum headbutting enjoyment, and all under the guise of supporting the core tenets of this website.

It's an almost airtight racket, if you think about it.

I think a major concern with DU3 is how a personality (like the one I describe) will game the system and leverage the new tools to cause even more havoc.

While the Administrators have done a yeoman's job explaining the technical aspects of DU3, it might be worth explaining to the userbase specifically how those new features will help curtail the dynamic I describe above and really make DU3 a healthier environment to hold discussions in. For instance, I believe a host may lock a thread and the only way to unlock it is to plead your case to the host who locked it. If, by some random chance, one of these personalities winds up in a host position, well, see the potential for problems there?

PB

p.s. As I've yet not accepted the Privacy Policy for DU3. I am unable to post this message there.

p.p.s. There is a certain grim and apathetic part of me that believes this post will be locked as quickly and as surely as if I'd filled it with slurs and links to pornographic images- that it will be locked in less time than it takes to read it. It's the other part of me, the one that thinks there's a possibility of repairing things by speaking openly about a situation everyone is aware of...that's the piece of me that's hitting the "Post message" button.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sufrommich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. "We all see the same things."
No, actually we don't. Who is this "we" you think your speaking for?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. "We all read the same site, after all. We all see the same things."
I didn't say we all had the same interpretation of them.

:hi:

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CaliforniaPeggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
2. Recommended, even though it didn't show. Yet.
Your points are well taken.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. Your second paragraph expresses a very real concern of mine:
Second, over the history of DU there have been a number of famously malignant personalities which seem to thrive on conflict with other users. Everyone knows their names and the list is long if you've been here a while. I don't mean people who simply have a differing viewpoint, I mean people who expend a great deal of energy to regularly inject themselves in unpleasant ways into discussions. And who clearly and openly relish the unpleasantness with which they do it. In my experience, it takes quite a few people to really promote a topic of discussion but just a few to stifle it, if they are determined enough.

Some very well-known users literally did this for years and years before being shown the door. Would it be controversial to assert that some of those types of personalities might still remain and that almost everyone would be familiar with their names and behavior- from regular readers of DU, to the moderators, to the Administrators?

We all read the same site, after all. We all see the same things.


I'm not overly alarmed about it (yet), but I can see the potential for abuse with this. I hope it plays out differently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I think some of the new features of DU3 are designed specifically to disarm...
...some of the worst types of gamesmanship we've seen on DU2. I can still see some potential problems, though- but of course the site is in beta and hopefully additional tools or processes can be worked out to address any "holes".

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
5. I think those malignant personalities are going to have a harder time on DU3.
Edited on Fri Dec-09-11 02:06 PM by Skinner
But the proof will be in the pudding. We'll see if it works.

As for having this thread locked, on DU3 you wouldn't have any uncertainty that the thread might get locked. If you post it in the Help & Meta-discussion forum, it would be left alone. Hosts (in Forums) only have the authority to lock threads as off-topic. Any host of the Help & Meta discussion forum that locked your thread would be clearly abusing their power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Thank you for the response and also the confirmation that such a post on DU3...
...in Meta would likely be left alone. I find myself, I think a number of us find ourselves, not really sure about how certain situations would play out because I, at least, wind up overlaying a DU2 template over things.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceNikki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
25. And I would think that those who host maliciously will be quickly ID'd and weeded out.
I really like the new model, Skinner. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
7. Is this DU2?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Yep, and it has been since they made the switchover in...2003 or so.nt
PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Oh, thanks - guess I never saw the originial DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. Here's what I think will happen,
if someone does what you say in a Host position. That person won't be a Host for very long. In Groups, the hosts of that group can dump a host instantly. In forums, Admins can remove a host. If such a host started locking posts, I can pretty much guarantee that one or more of the other Hosts will notify the Admins right away. Having spent three days on DU3, it's clear that the hosts who have volunteered for the job are taking the job seriously. I've seen the discussions in the Host forum, and someone doing that would be noticed right away and object.

Such actions would be disruptive to DU, so I expect that the Admins would remove that host from that forum fairly quickly, once notified.

I suspect that it won't take long before such a situation arises, either, so it will be tested quickly.

You and I probably don't agree on many things. I can tell you that I'd never lock a post of yours unless it clearly violated something. In forums, hosts are only allowed to lock OPs that don't fit the Statement of Purpose of the forum. In groups, it's another matter, but I'm not the host of any Groups.

I think you're worried about something that isn't likely to happen, and that will be corrected almost instantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
20. And, really, maybe that's the case. From what I've read, and I've tried to...
...read all of the DU3 threads both here and on DU3, the uncertainty that is out there isn't necessarily based on DU3 as a piece of software. It's how it will be used or potentially misused. I had seen a lot of threads on this point, and I think a lot of them were unnecessarily on the ominous side simply because there was some difficulty expressing the concern in a way which didn't break the rules, TBH.

You and I probably don't agree on many things. I can tell you that I'd never lock a post of yours unless it clearly violated something. In forums, hosts are only allowed to lock OPs that don't fit the Statement of Purpose of the forum. In groups, it's another matter, but I'm not the host of any Groups.


I don't have any reason to doubt you on that statement but I will say that as a long-time poster in the I/P forums, there are situations where an interpretation of a short "Statement of Purpose" could vary dramatically from one poster (or even Host) to another. I'm really interested to see how all that- not just I/P-related things, but a lot of topics- "settle out" in their groups and what sort of balance naturally achieves, or doesn't.

I'm not sure whether it'll be something that will happen fairly quickly or take a while.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #20
29. Your concerns may well be justified, but there's really
no way to tell yet. I can only comment on the tone of the discussions in the Host's discussion area, and it has been very even and thoughtful. I can't remember any member's name actually entering into any of the discussions except one. The discussion has all been about the SOP and how closely adherence to it by posts should be a factor.

The thing is that, discussions about DU3 are pretty free-wheeling in the Help and Meta-discussion forum there right now. I don't think any posts have been deleted, and people appear to be speaking their mind quite openly. Truly, I think these questions are better raised there. The admins are all very busy over there, so they're not spending as much time here, and the questions you have, among others, are being discussed in that forum.

I've not visited the I/P forum here or there except very occasionally, so I don't really know the issues in that forum. I know it tends to be contentious, though. I'm not sure what the host list looks like in it on DU3. I'll have a look and see how it's faring. If you haven't been hanging out in the Preview, I highly recommend it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #20
32. The DU3 I/P forum current has no hosts at all.
That means that the Admins are administering it. If you want to become a host in that forum, you can ask an admin to become the first host. The initial host can name other Hosts. It's going to be important in contentious groups to have hosts from both sides of the controversy, I think.

Group Hosts begin by having one host named by an Admin, and then by that host populating the host list by selecting new hosts. If you ask the Admins to become a host there, be sure to post a message in that forum first, since that's needed for the Admin to promote you to host status, I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. One man's trash is another man's treasure (or: Agenda much?)
You say: "While there are many users here who legitimately agree with and defend the President and Party from criticism, it's easy to imagine how a malignant personality could find a goldmine in conflict and a safe harbor of sorts by propping themselves up as an uncivil, nasty "defender" of policies openly derided here for almost a decade during the Bush administration."

A good portion of this board would amend this proposition to say "While there are many users here who legitimately disagree with and criticize the President and Party, it's easy to imagine how a malignant personality could find a goldmine in conflict and a safe harbor of sorts by propping themselves up as an uncivil, nasty "opponent" of policies openly supported here for almost a decade here."

Honestly: put on your backwards glasses. There is the possibility of so-called "malignant personalities" on all sides here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. And frankly, by far the most aggressive threadcrapping comes from the anti-Obama squad.
Seriously--try to have a positive thread here, about ANYTHING, even something so unreservedly positive no one can argue with it. I guarantee you you'll start almost immediately seeing people coming in and posting nasty shit about Obama, even if it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #15
28. And frankly THAT is your opinion.
We all have one or so they say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Your scenario is truly the only one that makes any sense here
A good portion of this board would amend this proposition to say "While there are many users here who legitimately disagree with and criticize the President and Party, it's easy to imagine how a malignant personality could find a goldmine in conflict and a safe harbor of sorts by propping themselves up as an uncivil, nasty "opponent" of policies openly supported here for almost a decade here."


This is a Democratic message board. It amazes me that the most anti-Dem posters here have decided that somehow, THEY represent DU/the Dem party and that their feelings and beliefs are the only ones pure and noble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
31. Didn't mean to imply the opposite was impossible- in face I've seen some of that...
...too. My point was that looking at a lot of these DU3 threads, specifically, the tone and the subtext- and sometimes the idea, blurted out- was one where people had concerns based on what I described. If someone wants to sow conflict they don't necessarily need a specific pretext...but it doesn't hurt, as they say, to have some "excuse" to fall back on when a particular behavior is called into question.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
styersc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
11. Just too many viewpoints.
We should come up with some sort of system to cut down on all of the diversity of thought. I recommend some sort of jury systems to make sure that ideas don't get too far away from the orthodox or popular. I think we need cliques so popular posters can dominate discussions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a simple pattern Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Cool, let's have the authoritarians self-select into positions of content control.
They will run this site like it was their job!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aletier_v Donating Member (262 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. "OBEY!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
14. You are so right. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mysuzuki2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
16. We all have the ability to self censor. By this I mean the
judicious use of the ignore and block user features. This should be sufficient for all but the most extreme or egregious situations. I don't really see the need for moderators to step in at all frequently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
19. DU2 is not DU3...
too bad you haven't ventured over there to see that.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
PeaceNikki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. I disagree. I think it's been great having Sid as a host.
Hosts are not the heavy had there that they are here and, personally, I think he's been doing a great job over there. That's been one of the coolest things with the limited members that are over there kicking tires and jointly hosting: getting to know people you either had no interaction with here or thought you didn't really like.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Okey Dokey! n/t
Edited on Fri Dec-09-11 03:07 PM by whatchamacallit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #24
36. Thank you for that...
:thumbsup:

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceNikki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. My pleasure
It will be VERY interesting to see how people's perceptions and inter-personal drama will play out.

FTR, *I* liked ya before DU3. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #19
33. Of course I have. I just haven't accepted the Privacy Policy. It's not kept me from...
...reading the various discussions at all.

Not sure what makes you think I hadn't.

:shrug:

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. Reading only is not fully participating in the community...
reading only doesn't allow you to serve on a jury, reading only doesn't let you alert and see how different that process is from DU2.

It's like a person who says they don't like skiing, because they looked at a picture of a mountain.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. I didn't bring up any points that required participating in a jury or...
...required me to login to DU3. I've been there, read the posts in the various threads, etc.

Since users are allowed the option of turning off jury service for whatever reason, I'm not entirely sure it's a fair assertion to start labeling members as "not fully participating in the community" simply for that.

:shrug:

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. You're talking about gaming the system, and the new tools...
I guess I thought you were talking about, you know, the new tools.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
23. I realized a while ago that my first response to any change at DU
is negative and that it has to do with how I feel about disruptions of things that work for me much more than it has to do with the changes themselves. That's vaguely embarrassing but, there it is.

I went over to DU3 last night and shopped the aisles for a little while. I like the way it is laid out, the way the fonts are clear and of a good size. Everything I tried to do or find was right there. Agree with MadHound that eliminating GD is not a good idea. Don't know how the jury experiment will work out. I'm in no hurry to start posting over there but I wouldn't be even if Grovelbot visited the admins in a dream and gave them the perfect upgrade. ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
26. I think you might be overstating one dynamic a bit.
Speaking only for myself and my experience, those "repeat offenders" you're talking about -- I'll bet I know just who you mean, as does most everyone else -- are far, far less prevalent than folks think.

Everyone -- myself included -- has come across an abrasive new poster and said "Aha!! This is so-and-so, back for more nonsense!!"

I don't think it would qualify as a violation of my confidentiality agreement to note that, in my time off and on as a mod over the years, I've read dozens and dozens of alerts that say as much. And I can recall two, at most three times that the alerter has been right about who the new poster used to be. And none of those have been lately.

This isn't to say we don't get, as you suggest, "repeat business" on the disruptor end of things. But they're almost never who we think they are/were, and my experience has been they do not last long at all before outing themselves or being discovered. The maliciously elegant and subtle "serial zombie" you're talking about -- again as I have experienced it from the moderator forum --is a rare creature indeed, and doesn't have a particularly far-reaching effect on the board's dynamics.

None of this is to suggest there isn't, however, a seemingly endless supply of new jerks who stumble across us. :D I think they are going to find DU3 even more difficult to disrupt than DU2.

Strictly my $0.02, and probably worth every penny. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Yeah Robb
correct our perceptions. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. No, merely perhaps your conclusion.
I have been as susceptible to the phenomenon as anyone; the only appreciable difference has been in getting to see the end result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
34. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Texasgal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
41. I must say that
I am so tired of having to prove my "lib" credentials here on DU2.

I have some differing opinions than others obviously, but the flames of not being "lib" enough really goat me. I'm not a freeper nor a disruptor, I am not perfect and have tried to follow the rules. I have been locked and I have ignored and been ignored. I am still a Democrat and will go to DU3 with a open mind.

I hope that DU3 allows us ALL to post our opinions easier without being flamed or chastised. I look forward to a nicer, kinder DU3 run by the community FOR the community!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC