opinion not given
On Tue Feb 18, 2014, 01:13 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
not really. plenty of people equally agree with recommend at the wrongness. 152 rec at this point.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4520661
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Seabeyond's claim that Manny made a joke about the president and watermelon is a very serious charge, but she doesn't provide a link. I don't think people should be able to make charges like this without some backup, so I think this should be hidden in case anyone thinks it's true.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Feb 18, 2014, 01:16 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see where anyone asked for a link. Many of Seabeyond's comments are worthy of a hide for sure, however this is not one of them. Leave.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I love third way manny, but he even apologized because he knew he stepped over the line. If many admitted the charge was valid, then Seabeyond is valid.
By the way, if you vote to hide this, do NOT hide behind the "no comment" idea. If you want to punish someone, explain WHY.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
For the record, I am juror number 5. My beef here is not with the idea that some people say things over the line. Seabeyond and MannyGoldstein are two of my favorite posters here, because even if I disagree with them, perhaps especially when I disagree with them, my brain muscle grows from the challenge. The idea that you get exposed to challenges to one idea's or knowledge is the whole purpose behind DU, either that, or we might as well just exchange Cat pictures. But here is my beef,..if people are going to vote to punish, which we all know could result in banning or tombstoning, why can't they at least put a reason why? If you are going to take the time to punish someone, at least read the charges. If you cannot take the time to comment on why you punish someone, then perhaps you should not be in the position to punish someone.
and if this means I get put on Jury Blacklists, C'est la vie, although the example I showed shows that, if nothing else, I do actually READ the article I judge. And no, if Manny or Seabeyond were to step over the line, I would call them on that, as I have told both of them personally.