We are going to be deleting some DU Groups. And we need your help to figure out which ones.

[unc70]

47. Agree. Be very reluctant to remove any groups for 4-6 months

It will take most of us at least that long to recover from the culture shock of the new version and to reconfigure, "re-"subscribe, and otherwise get back up to speed in this new environment.

Some things I like better, but there are many things from the previous DU that I miss and will need to "find" some equivalent or alternative within the new system, or maybe I just need more experience using DU3 so the new or the different can become the familiar. Unfortunately for me, my personal life and professional obligations are such I have little opportunity for even a quick glance at DU much less to get up to speed as a competent user. Maybe in a couple of months.

Before I can do much of that, I will need to do considerable testing and security auditing to see which, if any, browsers are safe with the new DU and what options and settings should be used. I am optimistic that the new DU will do reasonably well under this testing; prior versions have worked well using very limited browsers that support simple HTML and little more (no scripts, style sheets, plugins, etc.). In the past, Skinner, et al have been careful and avoided the problems that have plagued most sites. I expect nothing less from them going forward. I will be disconsolate if proven wrong.

Not that I haven't whinged about this and that here at DU over the years, most often regarding what I saw as coordinated efforts by other DUers to control, disrupt, limit, and steer discussions regarding candidates or hot topics -- and with what at times seemed misuse of the old Alert system. Somehow for over a decade, DU has continued to be relevant and an important resource for progressives in spite of the worst of our collective and individual behavior, of our emotions overwhelming our civility, of our egos driving us to "win" the argument in discussions, often battling endlessly over nits while distracting others from some important issue -- burying a few insightful posts under an outpouring of drivel. That is why I and so many of you care about what happens here, that those in the MSM and elsewhere look at DU to understand progressives and liberals, and that those wishing to influence what we think, believe, and do are active as DUers in support of their own interests, causes, and candidates. DU matters.

I personally have found DU at its best when researching and explaining some complex news story. Within the DU community on almost any topic, we have multiple members who are experts in its various aspects, who know the places and people involved, and who are incredible researchers on the Net and elsewhere. Plus lots of eyes looking for what is missing: the little-known connections among political, media, and corporate elites; the buried info in corporate financial filings; the nearly forgotten report no longer available on the net but not lost because a DUer had prudently saved a copy; and on and on. WMD. Wall Street. ... DUers have documented so much and so early, it's just frustrating when what most of us already knew has been ignored by nearly everyone else.

Running a large site like DU is challenging at best, a political one even more so. We need a strong and open DU going forward; I hope we have it and that the recent changes make it more effective with greater participation than before.

P.S. Over the years, DU has lost too many of its most-insightful members. Sadly, many have died, their experience, wisdom, and perspectives no longer available. Some others were driven out or were banned from DU because they repeatedly broke the site rules. Several of those who were either banned or who quit posting for other reasons had been among the best informed and most articulate in support of controversial positions here on DU. Most of them ran afoul of rules regarding personal attacks and such. In some cases, those banned appeared to have been targeted by DUers with opposing views who deliberately attempted to provoke an inappropriate response in order to get the target DUer banned. (While hardly at that level, I avoided several obvious attempts to provoke me; I was careful and lucky not to rise to the bait.) Those most emotional regarding some issue are probably also those most likely to get caught up in debating that subject and not notice the risk from how their responses might appear to outsiders. In almost every instance, those who were most cynical have now been proven right, many who ridiculed them have now been exposed as frauds and provocateurs.

In a couple of cases, there were posts at RW web sites bragging about how someone RW had infiltrated DU and then gotten some prominent DUer banned from DU. The new jury system should greatly reduce (eliminate?) the extra power of certain volunteer moderators over the last few years. Still possible, but much harder now to "game" the system with a few like-minded volunteers able to expel their opponents. It will be interesting to see how the dynamic "jury" handling alerts will change the culture at DU, how it might influence individual postings, and how it should keep any group from becoming dominant at DU. (From the rules, I suppose that longtime members that post regularly, thus likely jurors, will become the new target identities for groups hoping for power and control at DU. Hope enough of the safeguards work to thwart any such efforts.)

In light of the New DU and the new paradigm for moderation/jury, I wish at least a few of those who are now banned or discouraged could work with the DU Admins to rejoin and again enrich our community, The New DU. Now more than ever, we need everyone. It is solely the decision of the DU Admins, and I believe should only be considered after 3-6 months using the new system and working out any unexpected issues from using the juries. We need more that brings us together, less that drives us apart. We, not me or you.