Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias?

I am one of the many (dozens? hundreds?) who recently had their ability to rate comments and recommend diaries revoked. Like the others, I have no clue as to why this happened, although I agree with other diaries that last week's Bob Johnson diary is the common thread.

I have not been around here long. I was somewhat surprised, frankly, that I had privileges so soon after registering. So when my privileges disappeared, I wasn't surprised.(I was somewhat puzzled by the fact that I could still read hidden comments, however.) I assumed that such things were determined by a logarithm of some sort, which used a formula to weigh your cumulative 'mojo' to decide your 'trustworthiness', for lack of a better word. I had received a 'hide' rating from some right wing troll the day before, so I naturally assumed my 'mojo' was temporarily out of wack, and it would correct itself after a few days. I am not generally a conspiracy theory type of guy.

Then the diaries started. I was not alone.

As more stories accumulate, the anecdotal evidence overwhelmingly points toward mass punishment. I have looked through the comment histories of many of the people who, like me, have lost their privileges. I have found no evidence of trollish behavior, abusive language or other violations. I encourage people to read through my brief history here, and if they feel I have engaged others in an unfair manner to show me where.

After looking through my comments, try this experiment;

Go read the hidden comments. Click through a few pages to see which members routinely have their comments hidden. Read the comments to decide if they are supporters of Senator Clinton or Senator Obama. Now click through to their page to see if they still have the ability to rate.

I did this experiment last night. At that time, the first five hidden comments were all written by prominent pro-Clinton voices. All five posters clearly were engaging in abusive language, and deserved to have their comments hidden. And all five still had the ability to rate comments. One those five has never, in their entire history, given anything other than a troll rating. Ever. How does that not qualify for rating abuse? Why haven't they had their ability to rate revoked?

I did the experiment again before writing this diary. At that time, hidden comments 13,14,15 and 16 were attributed to the same poster, a prominent and strident pro-Clinton voice. They are still able to rate comments, despite the fact that they are routinely on the hidden comment page. At that time, Comments 1-3 were authored by pro-Clinton posters. All have the ability to rate comments. Comment number 4 was from a pro-Obama poster - no ratings. Comment 5 was by a Clinton supporter- rating history enabled.

Does anyone else see a pattern here? Again, this is all anecdotal evidence. But it sure points strongly to an unpleasant conclusion.


Poll
Do you believe there is a clear case of bias in the recent mass suspension of privileges?
yes
no

Votes: 36
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (none / 0)

Can we get this on the Rec list?


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:28:20 PM EST

Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (none / 0)

Wow, getting this on the REC list would send the most clearest message.

Stop being afraid of Jerome, if you think what he did is wrong than REC this diary.

Censorship will kill this site, and with no more HRC campaign how does this site make it.

Is this the end of the blog, because it sure looks that way.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:33:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (1.00 / 0)

"most clearest"?


Have you seen my other site, 777craprepublicanblog? No? Try 777smear.
by ChitownDenny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:39:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (none / 0)

I might not have perfect english but at least I am not a Republican campaigning for McCain.

http://777denny.wordpress.com/


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:42:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (2.00 / 1)

None of us can rec it :D


I CAN HAZ BAHROCK DONASCHON?
by kasjogren on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:35:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (none / 0)

I was thinking the same. Ha!


Unable to rec or rate Still supporting Obama
by astoria gooner on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:39:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Touched on here (none / 0)

I discussed this issue here:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1051 15/703


"The best way to show that a stick is crooked is not by arguing about it or spending time denouncing it, but to lay a straight stick alongside it" -DL Moody
by nextgen on Thu May 15, 2008 at 05:11:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show clear Bias? (none / 0)

Thats why it would send a message to Jerome.

He thinks that by taking our REC rights away that Alegre, SoCal Darling, LindaFSNM, Linfar, hillis44 all get full control of the REC site.

He only started this practice once the REC list was broken,  one day, JUST like today last week the "regulars" had only one REC diary up.

There was some that said "What! We thought this was a pro hillary site,  were leaving"

Thats how important the REC list is, at least to them and Jerome.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:41:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Have some phantom mojo, anyway. (none / 0)

At the moment, it's all I have to offer.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:18:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Have some phantom mojo, anyway. (none / 0)

Danke - and right back at ya!


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:20:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Have some phantom mojo, anyway. (none / 0)

You too - oh no!  You have given me loads of lovely mojo, I'll miss it - and thank you.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:49:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (2.00 / 2)

lol Ironically you are asking Obama supporters to REC a diary about us Obama supporters NOT having the ability to rec.

heh love the irony :-P


Congratulations to Barack Obama, the presumptive Presumptive Democratic Nominee
by TruthMatters on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:45:12 PM EST

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

I am hoping that Clinton supporters feel pationized by Jerome and in protest will REC this diary and say to him that Censoring democrats from democratic blogs is a real bad idea.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:47:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (1.50 / 2)

unfortunately george - there are some of your comrades that are giving BO supporters a bad name.  they swarm diaries, do not address the content of diaries, TR or HR inappropriately, constantly criticize or call out other users or admin and are generally nasty.  in my mind - anyone, no matter who they support - who does the above, should be punished.  and i suspect that they are.


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:51:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (2.00 / 1)

The hidden comments seem to disprove your theory... The page is routinely filled with posts from Clinton supporters who engage in nasty behavior, ratings abuse, etc., but still have the ability to rate and rec. You yourself are often less than courteous in your posts... i see you have your rating ability intact.


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:58:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (1.00 / 1)

see?  you are exhibiting exactly the type of behaviour that is making you lose you privileges.  you state the i am often less than courteous in posts, while sometimes i lose my patience - as we all do - very rarely are my posts as you state it - less than courteous.  disagreement is allowed, nastiness isnt.


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nastiness has its place (none / 0)


by lombard on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:11:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Nastiness is allowed, if you are a Clinton supporter. See: TeresaInPA.



McCain
by Black Anus on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:40:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (1.00 / 1)

see?  calling people out - a no-no.


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:50:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Calling people out in a diary title is against the site rules. I am not calling TeresaInPA out in a diary title.



McCain
by Black Anus on Thu May 15, 2008 at 05:02:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

You have no idea what you're talking about. None of these users had their privileges removed for being trolled, or hide rating, merely because they recced pro Obama diaries, at a time MYDD wanted to make sure the rec list was pro Hillary.

It's not about discourtesy or bad behavior - there's been enough of that on both sides - but VOTE RIGGING and frankly SELECTIVE DISENFRANCHISEMENT

Ignore the facts. Enjoy the temporary bias. But as I've said to you before

If they removed your privileges, JUST because you supported Hillary, I'd be on this same page, fighting for you


Pointing to the inadequacies of John McCain
by duende on Thu May 15, 2008 at 06:28:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK, now, let's think about this (none / 0)

You say a bunch of comments from Clinton posters are hidden (Yes, I've had a few myself).  Now, who is voting to hide these particular comments?  Not Clinton supporters.

So I would say the Obama supporters are the biggest censorship zealots.


by lombard on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:09:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

What's your definition of swarm?  If you write a contentious diary, don't you expect lots of people to turn up and disagree?


by interestedbystander on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

my definition of swarm is to write multiple comments that do not address the content of the diary, but rather use it as an opportunity to bash another candidate.


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:54:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree with you about censorship 100% (none / 0)

I have NEVER, EVER voted to hide a comment.  But, I have had a handful or so hidden.

Unfortunately, too many people here (on both sides) have been schooled under the tradition of a mob screaming  "troll, troll" (in some places in the world, you could replace the word troll with the word infidel) at every occurrence of perceived heresy.

Instead of responding to dialogue that is perceived to be wrong or offensive, the knee jerk reaction is to censor and banish it.  And the people that do this do it with pride because they are fully incapable of understanding that they are acting like lazy rabble.


by lombard on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:19:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Drat!!! (2.00 / 1)

Foiled again!!!


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:48:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

to quote itsthemedia: (1.00 / 1)


"We are the Obama. You will be assimilated. We will add your demographic and geographic distinctiveness to our own. Your website will adapt to service us.

:-p

Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant."


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:47:46 PM EST

Re: to quote itsthemedia: (none / 0)

eh? What are you saying?


Unable to rec or rate Still supporting Obama
by astoria gooner on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:55:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: to quote itsthemedia: (2.00 / 1)

As a person loyal to this web site do you not worry about what is left for this place after Barack officially has the nomination?  Jerome's action greatly diminish the potential for this web site past that point.

I know you think I am an asshole.  I have never claimed that I'm not.  But honestly, do you not see that this site is on the path to big problems?


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:55:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: to quote itsthemedia: (1.00 / 1)

no.

there are a handful of BO supporters here that do not do what i state in my 2 comments above.  i would wager a guess that they still have full rights on this site.


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:01:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The admins would be justified in banning you (1.00 / 1)

Calling them out publicly and accusing them of bias isn't terribly respectful of people volunteering their time to do a tough job.

Show some gratitude and spare us the whining.


by Michael Begala on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:50:50 PM EST

Re: The admins would be justified in banning you (none / 0)

how do Begalla,  what is untrue about this diary.

What other progressive blogs do this,

What other progressive blogs PROUDLY have John McCain campaigners on this site?
I have a feeling you dont care about that.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:53:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I haven't seen people advocate for McCain (none / 0)

and I'd troll rate any that did.


by Michael Begala on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:59:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I haven't seen people advocate for McCain (none / 0)

Michael,  if that is true, there is no way you haven't noticed ChitownDenny ???

Active campaign for RNC and John McCain:

http://777denny.wordpress.com/
http://777denny.wordpress.com/
http://777denny.wordpress.com/

Do you think it's right for him to be here trying to swiftboat our party?


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:15:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I haven't seen people advocate for McCain (1.00 / 0)

You flatter me.  I didn't know you thought I had that much inlfuence.


Have you seen my other site, 777craprepublicanblog? No? Try 777smear.
by ChitownDenny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 05:57:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I haven't seen people advocate for McCain (none / 0)

OK. Now I know. I've wasted enough time trying to talk to you reasonably about how voting for McCain in the fall is a betrayal of everything Hillary actually stands for.

And now I know

You're a betrayal of everything Hillary actually stands for.

How many other Hillary supporters are actually undercover republicans?


Pointing to the inadequacies of John McCain
by duende on Thu May 15, 2008 at 06:30:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The admins would be justified in banning you (none / 0)

Why ban?

If they are hosting a forum called 'direct democracy', calling out a supposed bias doesn't get more directly democratic than that.  Shouldn't this site be responsive to users?


"I'm all for the delegate battle, and now that Obama's campaign is too, I'm all giddy. It's going to be the supers as kingmaker." J.Armstrong 01/19/08
by obscurant on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:55:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

By your rationale, conservatives could post here (none / 0)

There are limits and rules.

And calling out the admins goes over the line, IMO.


by Michael Begala on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:01:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: By your rationale, conservatives could post he (none / 0)

I'm glad you're not an admin, then. But thanks for your input.



McCain
by Black Anus on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:49:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The admins would be justified in banning you (none / 0)

Gratitude for what, exactly? How have I called out the admins? One of the admins had their own diary about this last night, asking for feedback. He acknowledged that there is a perception of bias among the users of this sight. I pointed out a pattern, and pointed out that what I have is anecdotal. How is that 'calling out' the admins? I suspect they are not as thin skinned as you.


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:05:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Now we'll see... (none / 0)

... if I go the way of the other Obama supporters. Rec'd!


"Mom, baseball, apple pie, and a unified Democratic juggernaut."
by Purplepeople on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:52:06 PM EST

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

I'd rec it if I could


by dawolfe on Thu May 15, 2008 at 02:54:59 PM EST

recced (none / 0)

you can have my invisible rec.

I'm sending it telepathically.


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:04:56 PM EST

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (1.00 / 0)

You've got to be kidding:  " I have found no evidence of trollish behavior, abusive language or other violations..." re: Obama supporters on this site.


Have you seen my other site, 777craprepublicanblog? No? Try 777smear.
by ChitownDenny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:05:05 PM EST

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

But you are still a John McCain campaigner:
http://777denny.wordpress.com/

Its ridiculous that you are still here,
Why do you think that is.

Your like your candidate "Teflon John"


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:13:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (1.00 / 0)

Gee.  Your point is so well made that I have full privileges and you don't.  What does that tell you?  I know, I'm a repub and you're a dem.  If you're such a good dem, then act like one.


Have you seen my other site, 777craprepublicanblog? No? Try 777smear.
by ChitownDenny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:19:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Good Dems fight republicans tooth and nail.

Bad Dems (jerome) allow Republican activists to troll their site 24/7.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:21:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Seriously - why is this hateful troll still here?


by interestedbystander on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:54:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

I don't know.

Look at the bottom of the page, click Contact Us, and ask the admins.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:05:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Done.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 15, 2008 at 05:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

You are misquoting me. I said that I read through the history of some who had their privileges revoked, and found nothing to warrant the suspension of their privileges. I did not make any blanket statement about Obama supporters or Clinton supporters. The vast majority of mydd posters do not engage in disrespectful behavior. Some who do, however, have their rating ability intact. And those seem to be Clinton supporters.


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:14:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Why debate with a republican,  genetically they are not allowed to agree with you.

Just ignore him.

The Administration know who he is and what he is doing,  they have been contacted.
They are obviously complicit.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:16:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

If you don't like this site go start one of your own.  


by JustJennifer on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:09:15 PM EST

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

That's about as helpful as an "America - Love it or Leave it!" bumpersticker. I never said I don't like the site. It seems to be having some growing pains at the moment.


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:17:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Or death throes.


"I'm all for the delegate battle, and now that Obama's campaign is too, I'm all giddy. It's going to be the supers as kingmaker." J.Armstrong 01/19/08
by obscurant on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:21:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (1.00 / 0)

Don't know how else to say this but there are rules for living in America, just like there are rules for participating on this site.  The rules makes neither China.


Have you seen my other site, 777craprepublicanblog? No? Try 777smear.
by ChitownDenny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:24:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

You are so wrong Denny

In fact these VIRTUAL THOUGHT POLICE RULES make MYDD more like China than anywhere else

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/p rint/20070828_chinas_virtual_thought_pol ice/

But republicans like yourself love this kind of top down BDSM stuff. You'll find redstate very congenial. Take the next right


Pointing to the inadequacies of John McCain
by duende on Thu May 15, 2008 at 06:34:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

We like this site, just want to take away the Chinese government twist to it.

China bans google.

Jerome bans Reccing articles, because they will take away those pushing his agenda.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:18:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

If you are accusing the site admins of being facists I don't think that is particularly helpful.  And yes it may sound like I am saying "take it or leave it".. well I guess in some ways I am.  There are tons of blog sites out there.  I guess I just don't see that the site admins here owe anyone anything.  We aren't paid members, just visitors.


by JustJennifer on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:23:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

That really is quite over the top. I have not accused the admins of being fascists. I am pointing out what appears to be an inconsistency in the suspension of privileges. I notice no one has refuted the evidence I presented - any one care to? Any one care to point out the weakness in my thesis?


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:29:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

fas·cism  
forcible suppression of opposition

Sounds like you are accusing the admins of suspending users based on their rec'd diaries, troll ratings, comments, etc for and in support of one candidate over the other.  Seems to fit the description pretty well from where I sit.


by JustJennifer on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:34:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Ok, so then you agree Jennifer?

The ACTIONS are facist.

If you dont agree, then please elaborate.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:46:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

your argument does not hold weight.  my first diary to make it to the rec list, was just bumped by a diary that calls out another user and breaks the site rules (even though my diary has more recs).


"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." Plato
by canadian gal on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:27:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Of course it holds weight, it is true.

When there are hundreds of people accusing Jerome fo the SAME thing, with the SAME pattern what more can you say.

Your current example shows that Jerome is overwhelmed, there is probably very few to ban.

He banned us for simply reccing diaries not part of the elite group of posters he had.

You remember last Thursday what happened when the rec list was "violated"?

Am I calling Jerome a Facist?

NO!

But he does run this site like a Facist state.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:31:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

I must go to work...


Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:34:26 PM EST

The real problem for you (2.00 / 0)

The real problem for you, as I see it, is most progressive forums are 90% pro-Obama. This one is more balanced, so you can't stand the 'bias'.

Are the admins really biased? I see a lot of pro-Clinton and pro-Obama supporters, so my first blush impression as a 'newbie' is no.

Is it so tough to be a part of a site that has comparable numbers of Clinton and Obama supporters? It makes you look weak-minded, honestly.


by Michael Begala on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:49:53 PM EST

Re: The real problem for you (1.00 / 0)

Very well said!


Have you seen my other site, 777craprepublicanblog? No? Try 777smear.
by ChitownDenny on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:58:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The real problem for you (none / 0)

You've missed the point completely - everyone likes the fact there are supporters from both camps here, they just don't think it's fair that only Obama supporters lose their privileges, when by and large they are better behaved than the high profile Hillary supporters.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:58:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

'only Obama supporters lose.. privileges' (none / 0)

Prove it.


by Michael Begala on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:01:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 'only Obama supporters lose.. privileges' (none / 0)

Which part?


by interestedbystander on Thu May 15, 2008 at 05:11:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No ad homs (none / 0)

Please refrain from saying people look weak-minded because they object to being gagged.  You are not addressing the argument, and you are stooping to name calling.


"I'm all for the delegate battle, and now that Obama's campaign is too, I'm all giddy. It's going to be the supers as kingmaker." J.Armstrong 01/19/08
by obscurant on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:00:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I didn't say he was weak minded (none / 0)

I said his whining about bias because a site is balanced makes him look it.


by Michael Begala on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:02:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I didn't say he was weak minded (none / 0)

It's still an ad hominem.  You aren't addressing the argument, but rather how the argument makes the person look.  And you're not addressing the argument at all, really, even without your dig.


"I'm all for the delegate battle, and now that Obama's campaign is too, I'm all giddy. It's going to be the supers as kingmaker." J.Armstrong 01/19/08
by obscurant on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:06:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Objection. Nonresponsive. (none / 0)

The commenter said "Please refrain from saying people look weak-minded because they object to being gagged."(Emphasis added)

To which you responded: "I didn't say he was weak minded.  I said his whining . . . makes him look it."  

Anything seem, you know, wrong with this response?  


Obama leads the popular vote too
by kellogg on Fri May 16, 2008 at 09:44:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The real problem for you (none / 0)

Just to reiterate. I like the debate here.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT BEING A GENERALLY PRO CLINTON SITE

That's why I come here so often. To hear an alternative point of view. I've come to understand the passion that Hillary's supporters have for her.

But I never suspected the rec list was FIXED.

I thought it reflected a certain segment of democratic opinion. And as that opinion has shifted over the primaries, the admins have resorted to more and more desperate ways of 'staying on message'.

This betrays the principle of this site. And if you're unaware of those democratic principles, then you're actually more at fault than I am

To say again: no one is asking for Hillary supporters to be silenced or censored. We're just asking that this become a COMMUNITY again, and not a top down Prussian police state


Pointing to the inadequacies of John McCain
by duende on Thu May 15, 2008 at 06:39:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The real problem for you (none / 0)

The real problem for me is that there APPEARS to be a real bias here. I have shared why I came to that conclusion. You have not argued the point, only accused me of being 'whiny' and
'weak-minded', which makes you APPEAR somewhat, well... fill in the blanks.
Bush murders soldiers for profit. McCain wants to wet his beak.
by awobbly on Thu May 15, 2008 at 08:30:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

Add the signature.  Wear it with pride.


by Skaje on Thu May 15, 2008 at 03:50:29 PM EST

Trying to take the high ground (none / 0)

I don't think the whole "Bob Johnson" mass event caught up more users than expected.  When that happened, people realized what had happened.  


"The best way to show that a stick is crooked is not by arguing about it or spending time denouncing it, but to lay a straight stick alongside it" -DL Moody
by nextgen on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:04:22 PM EST

Oops (none / 0)

I meant to say the whole "Bob Johnson" even impacted more people then intended.  


"The best way to show that a stick is crooked is not by arguing about it or spending time denouncing it, but to lay a straight stick alongside it" -DL Moody
by nextgen on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:10:11 PM EST

Not just comments (none / 0)

Speaking just for myself, I lost my rec privileges, and there's nothing in my comments from when it happened that's inflammatory or against the site rules.  My guess is I lost my rec privileges because I recced pro-Obama stories.


"I'm all for the delegate battle, and now that Obama's campaign is too, I'm all giddy. It's going to be the supers as kingmaker." J.Armstrong 01/19/08
by obscurant on Thu May 15, 2008 at 04:12:21 PM EST

Re: Not just comments (none / 0)

Duh, after three weeks or so, that is the reason it was done.

Its much easier to click the "Who Recommended" button.

I think Jerome looked for people like me who Rec'ed pro obama diaries.


Unable to rec or rate

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

by GeorgeP922 on Thu May 15, 2008 at 06:02:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Revoked Privileges Show Clear Bias? (none / 0)

I joined recently and have been attempting to contribute in a positive manner.

I am an Obama supporter, but I do not call out or disrepect Clinton supporters.

I started posting here because I want Democrats, regardless of who you supported in the primary, to come together to defeat Republicans this fall.

I troll-rated a pro-Clinton guy who was ranting and raving, and who called another poster a "racist," in my opinion, unnecessarily.

Later that day, no more rating privileges.

I would think that even if you are pro-Clinton, you would want to keep the tenor of dialogue on this site as positive and respectful as possible.  So where did my privileges go?  I'm disappointed.


"I am like a Rorschach test...even if people find me disappointing ultimately, they might gain something." -Barack Obama
by tastycakes on Thu May 15, 2008 at 06:26:13 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.