On Saturday I posted a link to the following, and used the same headline that appeared in the article: "Happy Easter, Bilderbergers".
http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/04/06/happy-easter-bilderbergers-heres-a-little-problem-for-you-to-think-about/
Someone alerted and a jury voted 5 to 1 to hide the post. No juror stated a reason for his/her vote. The alerter's comment was as follows:
"Discussions of Bilderberger topics are prohibited by the admins in the TOS and are Conspiracy Theory posts, by definition."
The only problem here is that the article does not discuss Bilderberger topics aside from a passing putdown of several world domination conspiracy groups. The article is a serious discussion of the prospect on "'indeflation’ which is based on two simple principles: that there will be price inflation, but asset deflation: that consumables would cost more, and investments/housing/pensions would be worth less "
It's pretty obvious to me that no one - not the alerter and at least 5 members on the jury - bothered to read the article at the link, and instead reacted solely to the use of the word "Bilderbergers' in the title of my post.
Has it really come to that? I've been a member of this discussion board for nearly twelve years. When I first joined it was a different place, with thoughtful posts about issues of concern to Democrats who were feeling marginalized by the DNC.
Times change, and this board has changed with them. Nowadays it's sort of like cable internet, with each self-identified group and subgroup having its own channel. Once in a great while you can find a thoughtful original post buried among the fifteen or so threads speculating on George Zimmerman, or the Latest Breaking thread carrying a story that's three days old and has already been 'broken' five times.
My subscription expires this August. I won't be renewing. The people and the atmosphere that made DU an exciting and interesting place to be are gone, and it's time for me to go, too.