what does it mean to make over 100 posts in 24 hours?

[reddread]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by one_voice (a host of the General Discussion forum).

with about 50 of them overnight?
phenomenal.

[uppityperson]

1. Who, what, when, where, why....?

[reddread]

4. heavy on the why?

not to mention how?

[Comrade Grumpy]

2. It means somebody is a very busy beaver.

[Control-Z]

3. Perhaps someone has an agenda? (nt)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. Too much Red Bull?

[The Magistrate]

6. A Lot Of Coffee Handy, Sir? Insomnia?

I expect I have managed a hundred posts in twenty-four hours here on occasion, when my blood was up and there was a target-rich environment....

[Hekate]

134. Thank you, Sir. A target-rich environment, indeed!

[sheshe2]

150. Well done Sir! nt

[Judi Lynn]

164. So right! Thank you. n/t

[Tsiyu]

7. meth and DU do not mix

just kidding.

Actually, some of us are very verbose when we get going.

I hope you're not talking about me

[Ohio Joe]

11. Yes they do...

[L0oniX]

67. +1

[Ohio Joe]

13. Yes they do...

[L0oniX]

69. +2

[Ohio Joe]

15. Yes they do...

[L0oniX]

71. +3

[L0oniX]

72. +4

[L0oniX]

73. +5

[L0oniX]

74. +6

[L0oniX]

75. +7

[L0oniX]

76. +8

[L0oniX]

77. +9

[L0oniX]

78. +10

[reddread]

85. jury results

[L0oniX]

94. Post removed by jury decision

[L0oniX]

95. Message auto removed

[L0oniX]

98. Name removed

[Jesus Malverde]

131. lulz...

[JVS]

170. Deleted Subthread

[L0oniX]

199. Locking

[Ohio Joe]

91. Sheesh... I'm tired, does anyone have any more meth?

[Tsiyu]

156. I can't stop laughing

You guys are so bad

[Ohio Joe]

88. Thank you!

[Ohio Joe]

86. Thank you!

[Ohio Joe]

83. Thank you!

[Ohio Joe]

82. Thank you!

[Ohio Joe]

81. Thank you!

[Ohio Joe]

16. ...

[mike_c]

20. I see what you did there....

[Ohio Joe]

24. You know...

My first thought was to repeat it 100 times... But what I actually smoke is weed, not meth so I got bored

[mopinko]

96. hahahahahaha

[Paulie]

110. Or hungry

[seabeyond]

28. Ah ha. Nt

[babylonsister]

32. Ha! nt

[L0oniX]

64. You think you will get away with that?

[Warpy]

119. Meth or mania, take your pick

I can see a lot of bipolars in manic phase making a hundred staccato posts a day.

[mackerel]

153. I'm going with bi-polar

Same thing happens on another site i belong too.

[Scootaloo]

8. Funny cat pictures ain't just gonna post themselves, son!

[TBF]

9. DUZY

[KittyWampus]

10. you got me to laugh. Thanks!

[vanlassie]

22. OMG!

[Liberal_in_LA]

51. lol

[adirondacker]

103. Sweet!

[quinnox]

12. That's nothing, I have seen duers who joined a year or two ago, and they have over 20,000 posts

while I have been here since 2002, and am just getting to that number.

I think sometimes this kind of crazy posting activity is done to try and cover for being a relative newbie duer, it can fool a lot of other duers into thinking you are a long time duer if you have racked up a lot of posts.

That is why when I'm curious about a duer, I always check their profile and see their "join date", because no matter how many thousands of posts they have made, they can't change that date. I recommend others do the same, don't be fooled.

[Capt. Obvious]

36. I marvel at one member who joined well after me

and I think she has over 5x as many posts as I do.
And I picked up the pace over the last couple of months.

[quinnox]

53. I know what you mean. I have been posting "furiously" in terms of my normal pace lately, and by that

I mean, on DU almost every day, posting liberally, not being shy. Mainly because the closer to 20,000 posts I get, the more I'm encouraged to reach that number.

But my pace is still like a snail when I see what some others manage to do. I honestly don't understand it, unless they are posting every two seconds 24/7 in the lounge with brief trivial replies, or something.

[A HERETIC I AM]

66. Some folks seem to be at their computer all the time.

I've been here since Aug. of '03 and am just under 12,300 posts. I averaged 2.75 posts per day for a LOOOONG time, but now that I have a smart phone, a tablet and a hotspot I am able to get on more often. I still am averaging less than 3 a day.

I look at it this way: If you have a low average per day, you do more listening than talking, so to speak. That gets my respect.

[quinnox]

90. I guess so. I know there are others who post even less frequently than I have done.

Maybe its because there have been stretches over the years where, for months, I never logged onto DU. I guess those gaps start to mean something to your post count, eventually.

Like you, I have a tablet and smartphone too, so I guess I have picked up the pace myself.

[Art_from_Ark]

157. You have roughly 15 posts more than I do,

and I've been here since practically the very beginning.

[tblue37]

193. I have been here since July 11, 2004, and I have only 13,027 posts--no, this one

will make it 13,028. Apparently I have averaged just a bit over 100 posts a month over the past 3 months, which means about 3+ posts per day (again, on average). To me that seems like a lot of time on DU each day, since I read many posts before I ever see one I feel moved to reply to, especially when reading on a 7-inch tablet rather than a desktop, which is how I do most net surfing these days. (Because posting on a tablet is very awkward for me.)

I think maybe some people have more free time, or maybe posting on discussion boards is their hobby. I spend a LOT of time on *my* hobby (reading--books, articles, online material, etc.), and if that amount of time were spent posting here intead, I could rack up some epic numbers within a very short time.

[defacto7]

60. And what does that mean?

"it can fool a lot of other duers into thinking you are a long time duer"

Sooooo there is a certain club here that has higher value than the rest of us? Maybe extra privileges and brownie points? That would probably be correct I suppose.... But-----

Being fooled is in the mind of the fool not the fool-er.

[quinnox]

63. "What does it mean?" Whatever you think it does

For me, I take it into consideration, in various ways.

I mean, the concept of longevity and seniority is pretty basic in human society, speaking in general. Regarding DU, for example, if I think someone may be a right wing troll, and then see they have been here for a decade when I look at their profile, it will probably alter or influence my opinion, or cause me to reconsider it. Stuff like that. Of course it is not fool-proof, by any means.

[defacto7]

92. I guess we all have our methods

and that is as reasonable as any. I have heard from some more "experienced" DUers that there are very long term posters that seem to bide their time for years then pop out and write trash. That seems weird to me but... who knows. Maybe someone gets control of inactive accounts after a long time and uses them for less than DU-ish activities. ???

[quinnox]

100. Heh, there has been speculation of some handles being "sleeper agents", who only activate at certain

times. And some could be socks of long time duers, who when they first joined, made a bunch of dummy accounts, just in case they thought they might need them.

This is what I have seen others speculate on anyway. Honestly, I really don't care about this stuff, myself. It is taking DU too seriously for my tastes.

[Agschmid]

136. Someone said that about me once...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

107. It also seems to make them full fledged "experts" on this place

They seem very, very invested in making sure people conform to their thinking, or else.

[DiverDave]

162. I noticed that too

eom

[ProfessorGAC]

182. I'm With You

I've been a really long time (nearly 12 years) and i'm only at 24000 something. And, back in the day i posted in the Lounge a lot and the Musician's Group was far more active.

It's amazing how many posts some folks rack up.

[dipsydoodle]

14. Overnight in which time zone.

[reddread]

21. good point n/t

[arcane1]

111. Indeed. I'm getting tired of the longitudists getting a free pass on DU

[Z_I_Peevey]

232. snorf

[etherealtruth]

17. I have been here over nine years

I average slightly over 1,000 posts a year ... I can't fathom 50 posts in a day .... even during a horrendous flame war.

[Terra Alta]

18. I think it means you have a lot to say.

Not necessarily a bad thing. I've been on DU on and off since 2007 and I tend to read more than I post.

[RC]

120. More than likely they say a lot.

That doesn't, by any means, mean they have a lot to say.

[mike_c]

19. LOL....

[defacto7]

62. Big LOL!

[Spazito]

23. What does it mean to make note of how many posts anyone makes in 24 hours?

with an actual count and time frame?
phenomenal.

[reddread]

49. means I noted someones average yesterday, just out of curiousity.

and today I realized how little the average represented. If I was really curious, Id figure how much the average just got bumped.

[gollygee]

25. That depends

on whether they're long, thought-out posts, or whether they're short posts that don't take much work.

[femmocrat]

29. Exactly!

Was there a "word association" thread that I missed? LOL

[mercuryblues]

50. +1

K+R

I suggest the Op go read them all and get back to us with a detailed report.

[defacto7]

68. I tend to think

the most thought provoking information that can be communicated with the least amount of words is way better than "long" posts, thought-out or not. Some people work very hard at getting a rather empty point across.

[Kali]

26. I have seen it go for months before

someone posting 70 - 100 posts per day for MONTHS. You would see them in virtually EVERY thread you looked at.

[Steve Martines]

27. Probably that the person works for the entity she defends constantly

Perhaps.

[bobduca]

56. ...

let's hope not, there's enough wasted govt. spending as it is!

[sufrommich]

192. Interesting comment from someone who signed

up last night. Who is this "she" you are referring to?

[Solly Mack]

30. What do you think it means?

[GeorgeGist]

31. Bots!

[Capt. Obvious]

33. Makes one a pro

No amateur could keep up that pace.

[Nye Bevan]

80. That makes sense (nt)

[Hekate]

149. Well Nadine IS a professional journalist, but I don't think that means she should be criticized ...

...for posting here so much. Do you?

[gollygee]

34. OK I'm really trying to figure out your point

Do you type really slowly? If it takes an average of 2 minutes to type up a post, then it doesn't take much time to rack up that many posts.

This is not dramatic. Your outrage is more interesting than 100 posts.

[reddread]

38. outrage?

really, outrage?
can you tell me who will win the World Series this year?

[gollygee]

102. The Tigers!!

[ScreamingMeemie]

135. Right on!

[Oilwellian]

125. I don't see any outrage...geesh

I think the OP noticed someone with diarrhea of the keypad and an agenda.

[1000words]

35. There are some folks ...

who create an OP for just about every random thought that enters their head.

[MineralMan]

37. About one post every 14 minutes.

Not too tough really.

[reddread]

47. those are some short naps!

Id be cranky, too.

[RC]

121. I think you are on to something there.

[uppityperson]

39. It

[Agschmid]

137. Well

[uppityperson]

40. means

[Agschmid]

138. Played

[uppityperson]

41. some

[Agschmid]

139. I

[uppityperson]

42. one

[Agschmid]

140. See

[uppityperson]

43. posted

[Agschmid]

141. What

[uppityperson]

44. over

[Agschmid]

142. You

[uppityperson]

45. 100

[Agschmid]

144. Did

[uppityperson]

46. posts

[In_The_Wind]

58. Seriously

[Agschmid]

145. There

[no1uno]

48. Running Count

Is there some importance in keeping a running count?

[reddread]

54. definitely.

we will be discussing your output tomorrow.

[Z_I_Peevey]

233. If Dracula joined up with the Choctaws or Chickasaws

I bet that would be his name.

[LiberalAndProud]

52. Insomnia, probably.

Or could be a damn furriner. We have a lot of those in the wee hours of the morning.

[xfundy]

55. Some of us listen more than we speak.

But I've occasionally noted some posters replying over and over with short, effortless posts, smilies, etc., and have noticed some of them interjecting cancervative trash afterwards.

Don't have any current examples, haven't been here much lately.

[SwankyXomb]

104. "Cancervative"

I like that. Can I steal it?

[Texasgal]

57. It's someone that needs to get outside

and away from the computer a little bit.

I'm a big advocate of fresh air and life in general.

[reddread]

59. That makes proper sense alright

I dont think I could bear that much of anything.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

61. Blue meth

[quinnox]

117. lol

Maybe "blue-link meth".

[cordelia]

130. Ha!

[SidDithers]

65. Pretty weak-assed call out when you don't have the guts to name the poster you're calling out...

Why are you so concerned about how much ProSense posts?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4738399

Sid

[whatchamacallit]

101. Maybe because incessant shilling and propagandizing

makes DU suck.

[SidDithers]

105. ...

Sid

[L0oniX]

123. Nailed it!

[840high]

126. Winner.

[BainsBane]

133. I actually think this kind of petty gossip sucks a lot more

Besides, is there some reason you can't handle her arguments? Do you need to be shielded from them to protect your tender sensibilities? If so, there is always ignore.

[sabrina 1]

154. Exactly! n/t

[OilemFirchen]

203. And another!

Six years here (happy anniversary!) with an average of about 20 posts a day.

How many angels can you smash with a pot? A kettle?

[Vashta Nerada]

181. Whoop. There it is.

[JI7]

109. i see, so this is one of those type of threads

i guess it makes some people feel better about themselves .

[quinnox]

118. Same thing here with the OP in this thread -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4745523

Odd, that seemed to meet with your approval though.

[SidDithers]

122. Apples and oranges...

one thread (this one) is about a poster.

The other is about something fucking stoopid that was posted at DU.

This is a call out of a person. The thread you linked is a call-out of a supremely dumbass comment.


But nice try.

Sid

[morningfog]

146. LOL. I was wondering who it was. I've had that one on ignore for a long time.

[L0oniX]

215. +1 ...hey ...is my +1 a call out too?

[OilemFirchen]

197. I rather enjoyed that little diversion.

A poster who's been here a whopping six months, racking up roughly the same number of posts as I - after more than a dozen years - is obsessed with someone's post count.

Who says DU isn't fun anymore?

[fascisthunter]

84. Full-time job?

Unhealthy obsession?

[reddread]

93. most people would starve to death quickly

at that rate

[Vashta Nerada]

87. It probably means you're looking too deep into this.

[PowerToThePeople]

89. socks have been crazy the last couple days here.

[L0oniX]

97. K & R

[Gormy Cuss]

99. It means someone is

a slacker.

[JI7]

106. i find it strange that someone goes to discussion forum and is concerned by

people who post on the forum.

[Motown_Johnny]

108. Multiple sock puppets sharing one account? n/t

[beevul]

112. It means that there was a thread about...

Pit bulls, e-cigs, guns, gender vs gender, the nra, breast feeding, spanking, the olive garden, or some combination there of that I don't want to even begin to think about.

[L0oniX]

124. ^^^this^^^

[Tsiyu]

158. don't forget porn, tattoos, circumcision

and left lane driving...

[boston bean]

113. It means someone posted approx 4 times per hour for 24 hours. nt

[Cleita]

114. Perhaps it's a job?

[840high]

127. ...^ that

[laundry_queen]

115. It means they are never interested in reading anyone else's posts

only about getting their own posts out there.

I've been here since '04 (well, way before that actually, but I only lurked back then) and I spend so much time reading that I feel like there's just not enough time to always post as much as I want. I can see if someone was only concerned with getting their own opinion out there, and not at all interested in actual discussion, then yes, they might have quite a few posts. Takes less time to post your own OPs and then hit the 'my posts' and respond, then it does to actually look through a forum and read a few thoughtful posts. Unless, they are speed readers (I'm pretty fast, but I've never taken a speed reading course).

[CANDO]

163. I come here to read mostly.

Makes me wonder if I have the lowest post count of all DUers who've been here at least a decade? I can probably count with the fingers of both hands the number of days I've not been on DU in the past 12 years. I'm here every day catching up with what's going on in the world.

[ProfessorGAC]

186. LQ Stole My Reason!

Someone above said that only 2 or 3 minutes a post it's only 2 and a half hours of posting. But, since i read posts at least 10x more than i post, i'd need at least a 25.5 hour day to do that, unless all i was trying to do was throw 100 posts up in a day.

[hrmjustin]

116. Well some of us like to post.

[JNelson6563]

128. What does it mean to give a shit?

I'm not sure which is sadder, someone who posts over 100 posts a day or someone who cares enough to figure that out.

Julie

[Hekate]

129. Kephra used to post a lot, too -- with links. >clutching my pearls<

Lots of links. And he, along with Andy, is one of the patron saints of Early DU.

Just sayin'

[sabrina 1]

155. They provided interesting content. They were the kind of posters who attracted Democrats to DU.

Stood up for Democratic principles and DU was a better place when there were more people like that. A lot of the most interesting DUers have moved on to other venues, in RL where they don't have to argue against right wing talking points. Or see people defending Right Wing policies.

Lots more wondering if defending Democratic issues on a Democratic forum should be necessary.

Never remember having to defend SS on Dem Forums before eg. Pretty disturbing to have to do it all over again after spending several years doing it on mixed forums where Right Wingers were making similar arguments to the ones we now see right here.

[MADem]

216. Kephra was my "Go Ahead, Make My Day" guy. He ALWAYS made my day.

He'd be up and at 'em, posting like mad, just in time for me to read everything he'd posted. He always posted such a well-rounded collection of articles, too.

Miss that guy. I remember when his mother posted that he'd died at the keyboard, I was devastated.

[Hekate]

234. I miss him terribly, too. Kephra was irreplaceable

[ProSense]

132. It could mean

"what does it mean to make over 100 posts in 24 hours? with about 50 of them overnight? "

...that there is a discussion going on. I mean, I posted at least 50 comments in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024734785

Some people like to post hit-and-run threads. Others like to stick around and comment.

Oh, a kick or several doesn't hurt.

[Renew Deal]

143. I've hit that number before

Usually during big events like Dem conventions or Bin Laden's demise. Some people are get enthusiastic about topics or have plenty to say.

[Renew Deal]

147. What does it mean to notice that someone made over 100 posts in 24 hours?

[SidDithers]

161. Nailed it...nt

Sid

[neverforget]

148. They have a lot of time on their hands and need to

get out more.

[Deep13]

151. nothing better to do. nt

[RKP5637]

152. Insomnia! n/t

[Recursion]

159. XKCD: Duty Calls

What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being WRONG.

Also, some of us are in time zones where the day for us is the night for the continental US.

Also also, some people work reverse shifts and are up at night.

[elias7]

160. If # of posts is irrelevant or misleading, I have a suggestion.

Why not remove that stat from following ones name and instead state "member since 20--"

[JVS]

165. It's not hard to do if you get into a flamewar.

[DrDan]

166. I don't think it is that phenomenal

just did some quick math on one of our more prolific posters - a member since 2004

an AVERAGE of 42 posts per day - every day since September 2004 - 3,500 days.

So 50 overnight on one night does not seem that remarkable in light of long-term quantity.

Must have lost an inch or more off each typing finger.

[herding cats]

167. Let me guess, they were mostly about a DU "hot topic" too.

I've noticed most of the really long threads have only a handful of participants who make up the majority of the posts. It seems to be a symptom of the "I'm 100% right and you're 100% wrong! No, I'm 100% right and your 100% wrong!" Virus going around the internet.

[Chathamization]

188. What's annoying is when the participants in those flame wars realizes that others have stopped

paying attention to them attacking each other, and each one decides to create a new topic saying the exact same thing they said in the flame war thread. "Look at me...look at me! Hey! You're not looking at me!"

[sufrommich]

168. This is both Meta and a call out and yet the

GD hosts have let it gather 167 replies. Apparently some are more equal than others.

[JNelson6563]

171. The target of this call-out doesn't get to sit

at the kool-kid table in the cafeteria here at DU Jr. High so it will stand. Gotta wonder how many Elmmers are GD hosts these days...

Julie

[sufrommich]

173. I hope the admins are going to address

this obvious problem. The bias is sickening.

[cyberswede]

177. Who is the target of this call-out?

...which is actually irrelevant, since call-outs are a CS issue, not a host issue.

GD hosts try to be fair and consistent, but it's virtually impossible, and then hosts catch shit from everybody, regardless of what action is taken.

What I find Jr. High-ish is all the bellyaching about how hosts aren't fair - from both "sides."

[Spazito]

210. It seems to me whining about a DUer would come under the SOP as...

whining about DU. It certainly should, imo.

[pintobean]

224. Many hosts make it much more complicated

than that. Your point makes perfect sense. The job seems simple enough - does the OP violate the SOP of the forum? It becomes complicated when they consider irrelevant things like:
who posted the OP
what is that member's agenda
where does the member stand on this or that issue
is the member a long time DUer
is the member well liked
The same questions are applied to the alerter and, for some strange reason, if the alerter has posted in the thread.
Then, all that is also applied to the host who takes the alert into the host forum.

I understand a lot of alerted OPs are not cut and dry, but when all this other bullshit is thrown into the mix, it's no wonder that the process can be dysfunctional.

[Spazito]

228. I completely agree with you, I did a stint as a host for GD the first year of DU3...

and found all you have listed happening then as well. I would add those who would sign up to host and then never participate at all, holding a spot another DUer who wants to actually participate cannot fill for months.

I did read a post from Skinner in ATA which gives me hope there will be changes soon to add more explicit guidelines. Hopefully that will increase the functionality of the host concept. I still like the concept, it is the implementation that is flawed, imo.

[cyberswede]

235. I don't disagree, ideally, but this OP was an observation, not a "whine."

...and nobody was named (I had no idea who it was about until someone else mentioned it later). Hosts look only ATA the OP, not a replies.

I hope Skinner dogs provide some guidelines - that should help.

[Spazito]

236. I disagree it was an observation, the tone and tenor of the OP was clearly, imo,...

a call-out, a whine and, to be honest, smacked of stalking behavior regardless of whether the DUer being singled out was named or not. The irony is were I a current host of GD, the OP would not be locked because it only takes one host to disagree with a proposed lock to stop any action, our disagreement on this would ensure the OP would remain.

[cyberswede]

174. I disagree.

There's no consensus to lock this - that's why it isn't locked.

GD hosts haven't "let" this thread do anything - DUers have racked up the replies in this thread all by themselves.

There's no rule in the SoP about call-outs - that would be a CS issue for a jury. And Skinner said meta isn't prohibited by the SoP, either - unless it's whining about DU.

And to say "some are more equal than others" is nonsense - who the heck is the OP of this thread anyway? I've never even heard of him/her until this alert.

GD hosts catch shit from both "sides" no matter what we do. I suggest trying a turn as a GD host - it's illuminating.

[sufrommich]

176. Then why was Seabeyonds OP locked for being Meta

and a call out if neither are against the SOP? Her OP survived a jury and was locked without consensus too. You can claim all are treated equally but it's not so. This OP is a thinly veiled attack on Prosense and an invitation to falsely accuse a DUer of being a paid shill,bot,group of posters or whatever else the conspiracy kooks here want to fling. That's "complaining about DU" too.

[cyberswede]

180. It was locked because the inclusion of the jury result.

That made the OP "whining about DU." She alerted on a post, the jury didn't go her way, and she started an OP about it - in essence complaining about the jury result.

Every host who voted to lock that OP said they would have left it, if the jury result weren't included.

She had the opportunity to edit out the jury result, but opted not to.

As for "complaining about DU" - that includes things like complaining about jury results, host actions, site administration, etc. It doesn't include things like name-calling, innuendo, questioning a poster's motives, etc - those are CS issues.

I'd love to see call-outs prohibited by the SoP, but they're not.

[sufrommich]

185. And this OP is complaining about how many times

a DUer posts and inviting others to bash at will . The "but you can't post jury results because that's complaining about DU" is much less damaging to DU than these rock throwing OPs.I'm sorry,but the GD hosts are inconsistent as hell,and please don't suggest I try hosting GD,there's a waiting list of 27 people,many of whom put their name on the waiting list as soon as their hosting duties are done and host over and over again..

[cyberswede]

187. I agree GD host actions are inconsistent.

Without more explicit guidelines, I'm afraid that problem will persist.

However, I think the hosts are trying their best in good faith. It's just that no matter what hosts do, it makes someone unhappy.

And the waiting list for GD hosting has always been long - months long. So, even if hosts sign up right when their term ends, they aren't back on for at least a couple months. I don't see a problem with that.

[quinnox]

189. Huh? Wasn't prosense's recent OP a "call-out" of W. Pitt? So, it's ok if pro-sense does it, but not

others? That doesn't compute.

What's good for the goose…

[ProSense]

190. What does it mean when a poster is here for six months and starts a thread like this?

Huh? Wasn't prosense's recent OP a "call-out" of W. Pitt? So, it's ok if pro-sense does it, but not

others? That doesn't compute.

What's good for the goose…

WTF? I mean, the OP is beyond stupid, and that comment just shows how petty and caught up in nonsense some people are.

Too frigging hilarious.

[sufrommich]

191. Prosense's OP was a response to another OP,

something that is done all the time on DU. What is this OP a response to?

[ProSense]

194. It's about being pissed off because someone doesn't like dealing with posts

that counter his/her arguments. So the only reaction left is:

You post too much.

Why are you posting so much?

Stop posting so much!!!

[sufrommich]

195. Yes,I know. It would be comical if

it wasn't such a blatant attempt to kill the messenger.

[quinnox]

196. Sorry, but you don't get to have it both ways. Another question for you.

If someone in response to a pro-sense OP, says they think what pro-sense said was what they would expect a racist to say, would that be ok with you? After all, they are just responding to an OP, right?

[sufrommich]

198. I read the OP ,your interpretation of it

is different than mine.Prosense didn't call anyone a racist,she said calling the President a used car salesman sounds like something freeper racists would also claim.
Regardless,your defense for this transparent call out OP which is in regard to absolutely nothing other that a chance to throw stones at another DUer seems to be "she deserves it".

[quinnox]

200. Somehow, I knew you wouldn't want to answer that. Yea, if someone is going to start calling out

other duers, and say they are sounding like what racists say, OF COURSE they should be subject to the exact same treatment. It just is common sense.

[bobduca]

204. DU'ers that pretend that such transparent smears by association are acceptable

suck

[muriel_volestrangler]

183. The GD SoP doesn't say 'no meta' or 'no callouts'; it says 'no whining about DU'

which, as has been discussed by Skinner in the Hosts group, doesn't mean 'no criticism of individual DUers, or groups', but 'no whining about how DU gets run'. seabeyond's OP which got locked posted a jury result that seabeyond didn't like - which looked like whining to most of the hosts. Nevertheless, and I'm sure you've checked, some GD hosts support locking it.

I see you claim this is an attack on ProSense; I'd seen it and hadn't thought of that poster, so, yes, if it really is an attack on them, it is veiled (having just checked the last couple of nights, they don't post 'about 50 overnight', so it's quite possible it's about someone else). This OP is divisive, whomever it's aimed at, so I think it would stand a chance of a Community Standards alert, if you want to try.

[L0oniX]

217. Whew ...glad to hear that ...now I can call out myself in safety.

[raccoon]

169. It means they need to get a life. nt

[woo me with science]

172. DU is thick with Third Way/corporate propaganda. The bids to deny the obvious are absurd.

The 24/7 presence of the propaganda crew is blatant. The influx of corporate/MIC line-dispensing personas has been constant and unnatural. The tactics of disinformation, disruption, and smear are consistent. It is no accident that the propaganda brigade posts new OP's well out of proportion to their presence in the community, and they demand the last word in nearly every exchange.*

Everybody knows who they are. They have no credibility anymore.



_________________________________
*Watch for this.

[ProSense]

175. Silliness. Here

ACA Is On Fire - Obamacare Now A "Third Rail"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024747036

LOL!

[bobduca]

218. this.

but we have to pretend its "creepy" to notice the official smear merchant's post count!
Stalkers! Spreadsheets! Oh My!

[woo me with science]

226. I doubt they're unhappy with this conversation.

They know they are obvious, and they don't care. The point is to divert from all THIS:

Obama Reluctance on Bush Prosecutions Affirms Culture of Impunity
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024736340

''Looking Forward'' not only cleared war criminals Bush and Cheney, but the Banksters, as well.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024742039

Sorry, but we aren't getting entirely out of Afghanistan, if President Obama has his way
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024748067

Fuck this policy of the Obama administration: Admin defends investor-state provisions
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024742089

How Deficit Hawks Are Trying to Pit Millennials Against Seniors to Attack Social Security, Medicare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024748081

Spy Chief James Clapper Wins Rosemary Award: Whopper to Congress Clinches Worst Open Government
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024744012

Noam Chomsky’s nightmare: Once again, you can’t trust the New York Times
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024733837

NATO country (Turkey) just caught planning a false flag attack to jumpstart war against Syria
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024746775

Sorry, but I don't buy the "But we couldn't have gotten single-payer" defense
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024748524

Big Brother Is In Your Spotify: How Music Became the Surveillance State’s Trojan Horse
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024748085

[bobduca]

229. Note they all question any who would notice this, and try and say it's creepy to notice it.

CREEPY!!! SCARY!!!! lockstep responses like this just prove that they have the same agenda: to sell the propaganda.

[greytdemocrat]

178. Attack of the bots!!!!

[bobGandolf]

179. WHY? n/t

[Ikonoklast]

184. Besides creepy people tracking what other posters are doing, it means exactly nothing.

Bit it is definitely creepy stalkerish behavior tracking what other members do here.

[NuclearDem]

201. Cocaine's a hell of a drug.

[PeaceNikki]

202. As has been stated, the fact you keep tabs is creepy and says more about YOU than whoever the fuck

you are trying to get a dig in on.

Do you keep a fucking spreadsheet, creep?

[bobduca]

205. tabs, not dibs

pearls clutched.

[PeaceNikki]

207. my point stands and I am not clutching anything. just disgusted at the stalker-like behavior

that happens here with great regularity.

[bobduca]

208. Your post says the OP is a "creep", intimates the OP is a threat to DU'ers, quite sinister! Oh my!

pearls fucking clutched.

[PeaceNikki]

209. It is creepy to track the number of posts others make here.

Only a creep would do that.

or defend it.

[bobduca]

211. whats creepy is how you all pretend racist smears by association are cool.

[PeaceNikki]

212. I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

[bobduca]

213. Ah but its a call-out thread right? keep up

Maybe you have the official smear merchant on ignore too.

[PeaceNikki]

219. I am not on top of the DU outrage of the week or the backstory behind this stupid OP.

And it doesn't matter. Whatever the backstory, keeping TABS on others here to this degree is weird. Further, bragging about it by starting an OP is creepy.

[bobduca]

220. straw man agrees with you, keeping tabs is creepy

[woo me with science]

221. No, what's *creepy* is infiltrating discussion boards with pro-corporate propaganda and smear.

What's *creepy* is the new normal of manipulative, interactive propaganda campaigns against people gathering to have political discussions in the United States of America.

This is sick behavior by a political system, echoing tactics from totalitarian countries rather than what we expect from the United States of America. Those who choose to participate are selecting an occupation beneath contempt and incompatible with human conscience and decency. The existence of the propaganda machine shows exactly how corrupt, diseased, and devoid of respect for citizens the relationship between Americans and those who pretend to represent them has really become. This sort of corrupt manipulation should not be the new normal in the United States of America.

[PeaceNikki]

222. Spiders are also SUPER creepy. But the fact that they are creepy doesn't make the OP less so.

[woo me with science]

223. How perfectly illustrative of the sneering contempt

we have grown to expect from this corporate government *and* its propaganda machine.

[PeaceNikki]

225. .

[fredamae]

206. A Nice Check? n/t

[Ms. Toad]

214. They post about 15x as much as I do, on average?

Is there a reason for this silly speculation?

[NCTraveler]

227. It means you have too much time on your hands.

Why does this interest you reddread?

[reddread]

230. because of the Memorymoog, primarily

[polichick]

231. Some decent conversations?

[one_voice]

237. Locking this...

doesn't fall within SOP for GD.