HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » merrily » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 61 Next »

merrily

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:49 AM
Number of posts: 44,264

Journal Archives

"Protected" groups, community standards and jury results.

1. Jurying posts in protected groups. It seems to me there are disconnects between the history and descriptions of protected groups and the new practice of not informing jurors that the post they are jurying is in a protected group. Please understand, I am not advocating for any particular rule for protected groups. If posts in protected groups are to be treated the same as posts in the board's main forums, that is certainly your call. However, in that case, I think people should be advised of that explicitly, so it's not a "gotcha." If, on the other hand, if you want community standards to develop for protected groups, then I think jurors need to know they are jurying in a protected group.

2. Posting jury results. Full disclosure of my bias: As a general rule, I oppose secrecy and support transparency absent very good reasons. If people are subject to losing privileges for a post of X type, then I think they should know, to the greatest possible extent, exactly which kinds of posts are included in X. With a jury system, that is difficult as jurors, like judges, are human and go with their biases. (The number of 5-4 decisions in the SCOTUS pretty much prove to me that judging is not a purely objective exercise.) My solution for transparency was posting jury results whenever I reasonably could. However, your recent post indicated that was disruptive of a thread and I can see that point very readily. What about a forum where nothing but jury results get posted. That would help people better understand what risks they are taking when they post. Otherwise, I don't think community standards are developing, just luck of the jury your post draws. (As you probably know, the community standards test evolved out of the desire of the SCOTUS to stop judging porn. However, the cases articulating how community standards apply to a particular work are all available to the public.) For me, it's a question of fundamental fairness.

Why was my sig line removed?

It had consisted of Bernie's name, in rainbow colors, just his name, no 2016 or anything like that.

There was also text welcoming Brockolis and Brockettes to DU. I did not think that was a big deal, since Brock did a press release announcing online hires, but I can understand why you might want to remove that. I don't get removing Bernie's name, though. At first, I thought all Bernie references were being removed from sig lines, but I have since seen others on the board.

It's not a huge deal, but I am wondering why some Bernie supporters are able to have his name, campaign buttons, etc. in their signature lines while others are not.

Everyone needs to stop pretending politicians don't know what Americans want.

Good stewardship of our tax dollars, including a fair, progressive tax system
Physical safety without excessive infringement on the bill of rights--because if you and yours are dead, you don't need much from politicians. (BTW, this includes safety from LEO)
Peace and a nation that deals honorably with other nations, both of which usually improve your chances of physical safety and allow you to sleep at night
Clean air and water, affordable, healthy food and slowing global warming to the greatest possible extent
Affordable housing
Free, good education from at least k through 12, but preferably pre-K as well
Free or affordable education beyond that
Jobs with decent wages and benefits, including a right to unionize
Ideally, parks, museums, libraries and other "extras" that nourish mind, body and soul
Fraud free dealings with privates businesses and with our government

Does the above list sound like basics that anyone who claims to be a public servant should be able to figure out?

Well, guess what, they have figured it out. They KNOW what you and I want/need. Now you figure out why this list does not look like the list of priorities of your city or town, state or federal government.

Judging by last night's threads, apparently, many thought it was like New Year's Eve.

Come to think of it, nothing actually happens at midnight on New Year's Eve, either, so it was indeed a lot like that.

At 1:15 a.m. Eastern time, though, Fumesucker started a great thread. http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512207046

And the start of the summer solstice was marked with a full moon and a strawberry moon, which are rare for the summer solstice. So, there was that.

elleng's start of summer thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027933930

elleng's full moon/summer solstice thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027934147

Judi Lynn's strawberry moon/summer solstice thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/122847862

Happy summer, y'all!

The Orlando 49 and so many other members of the LGBTQ community. Will you help?

Members of the LGBTQ community in the US and around the world go through so much. Maybe we can help.

Let's start with posting some organizations that do good work. I'll start:

The one to which I have been donating is the Human Rights Campaign

Donation Page

From Behind the Aegis

The Trevor Project, which is a suicide hotline for LGBTQ youth and others, as well as a resource for LGBT people struggling and Cyndi Lauper's True Colors Fund which works to end (and addresses) LGBT homelessness, especially among youth.


Donation Page, The Trevor Project

Donation Page, the True Colors Fund


cnn also did a story about helping the victims of the shooting. The story mentioned several organizations raising money for the victims, including Equality Florida, which Behind the Aegis also cited, and an Islamic American organization that is raising funds for the victims.

I can't "parent" the thread this morning, so please keep it kicked. Thank you.


What happened to Beam Me Up Scottie?

His or her profile indicates his or her account is active.

Love to members of DU's LGBTQ community and their supporters

I hope that the headline of this posts covers all DUers.

We're sending love, that's all.

Posting only for transparency. I cannot post on the thread of the hide, because it's my hide.

For the record, I think the hide call could have gone either way, but I don't mind it.


On Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:20 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I have never seen a post from you with facts, analysis, law or links or anything I can respect.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2163314

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Blatant personal attack. I get that people are frustrated but stop with the personal attacks.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Jun 9, 2016, 09:42 AM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree that the post is unnecessarily personal and rude.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not a personal attack.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Terrible alert!
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Exactly how self-defeating have we become?

During a Democratic Presidential primary, we will endlessly debate policies, personalities, etc. as though our very lives and those of our families depend on it--and they well may.

However, as soon as it at least starts looks like we may have a Democratic Presidential nominee, we pivot to "But don't expect anything much good to come after Inauguration Day because Congress."

We'll even accept and defend a Democratic President's nominating a Republican to the Supreme Court. Apparently, we draw the line only at a Republican President nominating a Republican to the Supreme Court.



But...why can we expect nothing much from Congress? Because Congress is not responsive to the will of voters, at least not sufficiently. Why isn't Congress sufficiently responsive to the will of the voters? Most humans seem to enjoy feathering their own nests and those of their relatives, friends and lovers; and politicians seem to love being elected and re-elected. Being elected and re-elected seems to require campaign donations from big business and the very wealthy as much or more than it requires representing more ordinary constituents. A feathered nest during post-public career often involves a lobbying job, sometimes disguised as a law firm job. So, legislators are loathe to annoy their potential future employers, aka big business and various business interest groups.

So, what do the majority of Americans do? We do not insist upon laws that will at least seek to cut into this undesirable pattern. We reject the candidate who talks AND WALKS accepting donations only from ordinary individuals. We condemn primary challenges and defend to the death every law, policy and practice that helps keep incumbents entrenched, thereby insulating them as much as we possibly can from a need to be responsive to voters. We even accept rigged voting machines and other shenanigans, especially if our candidate wins. If shenanigans cause our candidate to lose, we may grouse, but, in the end, we do nothing--at least nothing that requires us to leave our computers. Perhaps, we may send yet another oh, so very effective email or "sign" yet another one of those oh, so very effective internet petitions.

My conclusion: With everything in us, we want absolutely nothing to improve--unless, of course, our fearless leaders tell us something must improve--which they seem to do most when the opposite party is in the majority. When they stop rabble-rousing about that topic, so do we. Oh, and though we call them the "public airwaves," we allow them to be in private, plutocrat hands that only help perpetuate all of the foregoing.

For anyone who assumes this post is about 2016 or Senator Sanders and only about 2016 and Senator Sanders, you are mistaken: Not only do I intend to be alive in 2018 and well beyond, but I assume and hope that our children and other descendants will be alive much longer, environment willing, and the oceans don't rise (too much more).

Interested? Have some time? Links to sources about election fraud

I have posted most of this block of links in replies in GD: P, but I may as well post them here, too

The first link is to a post about a lawsuit filed June 6 that supposedly proves election fraud in more than one state. The others are about a California lawsuit and allegations of massive fraud in Puerto Rico, just in time for an AP declaration that Hillary was the nominee the day before the California primary It's a lot and there is a two hour video at one of the links. Still, if you are interested and have time, here are the links.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280210073

https://kobi5.com/news/local-news/possible-voter-fraud-shadows-california-primary-28826/

http://www.gregpalast.com/placebo-ballots-stealing-california-bernie-using-old-gop-vote-snatching-trick/

https://twitter.com/BernieVolunteer/status/733147225040113664

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141480818

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/bernie-sanders-california-primary-lawsuit-registration

And studies show that voters tend to prefer to vote for the winning candidate. They feel it makes them seem right and smart. So, the timing of the AP announcement, on the heels of allegations of massive fraud in the Puerto Rico primary,* probably did damage Sanders, despite all the red herrings to the contrary.

http://caucus99percent.com/content/order-declare-hillary-victory-today-dnc-generates-puerto-rico-fraud-top-them-all

http://caucus99percent.com/content/what-happened-puerto-rico-democratic-primary-volunteer%E2%80%99s-open-letter
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 61 Next »