You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #176: not quite [View All]

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 » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
m berst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-04 03:19 AM
Response to Reply #167
176. not quite
I don't think that anyone was trying to get anyone to stop any line of investigation, rather some were warning the others that they may be being set up. Bozos got frustrated and went over the line in the way he said things. Clearly, if someone did want to stop a line of investigation, his method would not have been the way to go and could never have worked. It can be very frustrating to be accused of bad motives. Bozos found and posted very strong evidence that DU was being intentionally fed false info. That should be a worry for all of us. Unfortunately, when we start down the road of suspicion and innuendo it can get out of hand fairly quickly, and we should probably all be alert to that danger.

So I would say don't be too quick with throwing suspicions around. That won't catch real disruptors, and can hurt innocent people and the community as well.

As I said on another thread, it isn't so much that I am telling anyone that they are being too paranoid (as in suspicious and alert) and that they should "move along now" - rather I am saying that they may not be paranoid enough and may be naive, and that throwing suspicions around the moment they pop into your head is not a good tactic. That problem can be solved by strengthening the community and by thinking before accusing and by more communication, not less.

An intelligent disruptor would not come on and overtly discourage people from pursuing a line of investigation, because that would make DUers more determined to pursue it, not less. If they were clever, they would go the other way. The relative integrity and validity of every line of pursuit so far has been reliably discovered through a process of trust and openness, which takes time, discernment, and common sense. Charges of "disruptor" and "infiltrator" break that trust and openness down.

People are on edge and it is easy to jump to conclusions. I have made mistakes myself. If we take our time, think things through, and resist the urge to throw verbal hand grenades into the threads it can all be sorted out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform 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