I just wanted to post a quick note of support for Violet Crumble...

[stevenleser]

... I just sorted through everything that "went on" the last few days. I think she made an honest mistake, we all make them and she is one of my favorite DUers.

[greatauntoftriplets]

1. To Violet!

She's a good' un.

[Kaleva]

2. I've always liked her.

[cyberswede]

3. I agree wholeheartedly.

She's a keeper!

To Violet:

[In_The_Wind]

4. I've always liked her.

Last edited Wed Jul 9, 2014, 09:43 PM - Edit history (1)

I hope she's back soon.

And, yes, we all make mistakes.





Even me

[BainsBane]

5. Everyone makes mistakes

Lord knows I have, but it's nice to see people acknowledge that they understand they have made one.

Edited for clarity: meaning I would like to leave it up to her to speak for herself on that issue.

[Little Star]

9. I've been following this.....

and am glad she acknowledged that she made a mistake. Can you point me to where she did that? Thanks BainsBane.

[BainsBane]

12. I haven't seen it

I don't believe she has posted since yesterday morning. That was kind of my point. I'd like to hear it from her.

She must have come back to unlock Quinnox's thread for him to immediately lock it again (because only the locking host can unlock), which does make me wonder if she understands the mistake. But as I said, I have made plenty myself. I'll leave it to her to speak for herself.

[Little Star]

13. Sometimes I'm a bit slow. Duh!

[BainsBane]

14. No, it was how I wrote the sentence

I edited it to clarify. Your interpretation was perfectly logical given how I wrote it.

[BainsBane]

126. She does below

In case you missed it. I think she addressed it well.

[Little Star]

129. Thanks.

[Throd]

6. Is there a back-story? Seems like odd times at DU as of late.

[stevenleser]

7. It's a bit convoluted. Has to do with the whole Quinnox issue/banning. nt

[Throd]

10. Thanks. That's all I need to know. I'm going to walk away from this thread now.

[Number23]

38. (in my best Jimmy JJ Walker voice) SAY WHATTTTT???!!

Has to do with the whole Quinnox issue/banning.

Are you saying what I THINK you're saying??! Oh, PLEASE let it be so!!!

[SidDithers]

42. Yup...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=119344&sub=trans



Sid

[Number23]

45. Hot Damn!!!

But it's too bad he didn't get a chance to take up my suggestion before he was shown the door http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024126043#post207

As usual, the admins are the last ones to the Clue Party but I guess we should all be glad that they got there eventually.

[Tarheel_Dem]

130. +1

[PeaceNikki]

8. In the spirit of moving on...

I hope the general tone changes and will do my part to facilitate that.

And I sincerely appreciate the efforts of others to do the same. I hope she is among them.

[The Magistrate]

11. What Happened, Sir?

She is good people.

[stevenleser]

15. I will PM you. I don't want to make this OP/thread about the ugliness. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

80. Gee Steve it already is about the ugliness.

Plus the details are all over this thread and twelve others. But please do spare us, we might (I was going to say faint but that would be attacked) have a coronary event.

[stevenleser]

92. Alas, the details did get posted shortly after I expressed those comments.

Luckily I think this has been a mostly constructive discussion.

[ellenrr]

150. cd you pls pm me too? I knew Violet, used to email her, but lost touch with her, and

not being a du "insider" have no idea what is going on.
thanks.

[cyberswede]

16. She was taken advantage of by a troll

Now-banned troll quinnox persuaded her to lock one of his shit-stirring OPs (rather than self-deleting it, because he wanted to save face), and she ended up catching heck for it.

Though her action was ill-advised, I'm sure her intentions were good.

[JI7]

18. there was no being taken of advantage there

[cyberswede]

25. I've been in contact with her, and I believe she acted in good faith...

though I wouldn't have locked a hosts's OP by request, I'm confident her decision was made in consideration of what she thought was best for DU.

Since we can't know what was in another person's mind, I respectfully suggest we all give her the benefit of the doubt. She's been a good DUer for a long time.

[Go Vols]

27. +1

[JI7]

29. good point, hopefully she will do the same for those who alert that were ignored before

[Tarheel_Dem]

133. +1

[BainsBane]

44. I don't doubt she did what she thought was best

but there are procedures regarding host consensus. She knew she violated those. I also find it odd that Quinnox managed to lock the thread immediately after she unlocked it, and she never posted about her unlocking in the host forum. That again is not standard procedure.

We all have our ideas of what is best, but this isn't our personal fiefdom. No one member is allowed to make decisions on their view of what they think is best for DU, since those views can vary so greatly. What was clear to me from those hosts discussions posted in my thread is that many people are unable or unwilling to consider there might be a distinction between what and who they like and what is a fair and just procedure for locking threads.

[Sissyk]

66. Plus a hundred!

I meant to say earlier that I agree with everything in this post.

[uppityperson]

19. good summary. nt

[stevenleser]

21. I wouldn't have known that locking someone else's OP at their request was a bad thing.

That could easily have been me.

I know it now, because I have read through the whole mess including the statements from Skinner way back about that, but I wouldn't have known.

To me the difference between a self-delete and a lock doesn't amount to much, particularly when most self-deleters post a reply with the contents of their OP so everyone can read it anyway.

[PeaceNikki]

24. She knew better.

I don't know what compelled her to do it, but she knew better even if you or others didn't.

We all fuck up. We all get pissed sometimes and do or say shit we shouldn't. But adults own it and move on.

[bettyellen]

30. It was while the hosts' group consensus was to leave it, so actually it is kind of serious

that she would do a favor (actually, two) for that troll and in doing so, defy the hosts group.

For whatever reason, she also sided against DUers who were bothered by Quinnox trolling them and blamed them for his disruptive threads.

She did him a second favor by unlocking -without informing hosts, also big no no. And that is that.

[Sheldon Cooper]

31. Yes, it's kind of hard to see this as just an unfortunate mistake that anyone could have made.

[bettyellen]

33. agreed- it was with full knowledge of how disruptive it would be, no "mistake" there.

very poor decisions- yes. mistakes, nope.

[cyberswede]

32. Fwiw, she quietly unlocked it on her own, without posting about it in F&G.

That he jumped at the chance to lock it again himself (rather than self-deleting) was entirely his decision, and not hers.

[bettyellen]

34. knowing the proper thing to do would be informing the hosts who were upset- but instead Quinnox is

the only one that finds out about it? After they had already PMing back and forth about her doing favors for that troll?

None of that sounds like a mistake to me.

[Number23]

39. Wait... are you people saying that quinnox was banned??!

I go away for a few days and this precious miracle happens???!

[PeaceNikki]

40. it's true. There's a 420+ reply post about it on page 1.

[JI7]

41. yes, it's the thread about a Bridge and Troll with over 400 posts as of this moment

probably my favorite ban ever

[Number23]

46. Going through it now! I am laughing my ass off at these "ohh, why didn't people just put the

troll on ignore and leave the poor dear alone??!" posts. As if it's everyone else's responsibility to ignore the trolling fuckwittery that goes on around here constantly.

That poster, his friends and the folks that he supported (and we all know who falls into both of those categories) should be on notice now. We'll see if it does any good.

[JI7]

48. did you see the threads during the past few days which led up to this ?

it was some ugly stuff which just got worse and worse.

but it was very revealing .

it says something that it took the admin to ban him yet most of his posts remained while those who objected would get hidden.

[Number23]

50. No, I didn't see them. I have grown utterly exhausted by this place and don't spend nearly as much

time here as I used to.

There is so much ignorance and denial here. The fact that the thoughts and perspective of people of color are met with such OPEN ignorance and hostility and that people like quinnox (and others, and you know who they are as well as I do) are so popular among certain giggling, clueless crowds here makes my flesh crawl and my head hurt. I can't be bothered.

[cyberswede]

107. I hope you stick around a little, at least. We need your voice.

I always appreciate your insight.

[Number23]

125. Thank you for that. That is really kind of you.

[BootinUp]

120. I like the way you put that

"it says something". Unfortunately that subject is probably not one that can be talked about too much, its the elephant in the room.

[Tarheel_Dem]

134. You have to give props to Q. Not only did he game the system, but he charmed & trolled the "hosts".

The huffery that has ensued in the wake of his demise, makes me.......

[Number23]

138. Oh girl, please. He only charmed and trolled those displaying the same behavior as him

He fooled no one with a lick of sense. But that does explain the "huffery" around here that you mentioned.

[PeaceNikki]

142. mmm hmm.

[Tarheel_Dem]

144. The huffery has gone to DefCon Level Nth, with his departure. Funny that he departs....

and another returns the day after.

[SidDithers]

154. "Huffery" is a great word...

Sid

[Tarheel_Dem]

156. It does kinda roll off the tongue, don't it? And is perfectly suited to this "situation".

[bettyellen]

43. Happy to be giving you the good news, my fellow group member!

[rhett o rick]

53. Yes her intentions were good and she didnt deserve the harassment she got. Now we have

some here trying to pretend that they didnt trash her. They owe her an apology.

[BainsBane]

75. Reading the host threads posted in GD was certainly an eye opener.

and not in a good way.

[boston bean]

78. Here is a snippet of my posts as GD Host regarding this which I think explains most of it:

The below is a conversation I had with quinnox after he finally showed his face in the hosts group:

From my point of view and how things went down:

This post (see link) was locked by GD Host Violet Crumble at 7:30am eastern this morning

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025208861

It now shows it has been locked by quinnox.

How the hell did that happen?

quinnox (20,600 posts)

3. Yes, I re-locked the thread. After seeing the abuse and attacks that were aimed at Violet, I don't

blame her for bowing out.

I hadn't realized that hosts can lock their own threads, until I saw a suggestion by another host in another thread here.

I think all those who attacked Violet owe her an apology, that was very ugly to see all those attacks.

This lynch mob mentality is out of control.

I will only unlock the thread if directed to by an admin. Period.

I wanted it locked in the first place because the lynch mob started attacking and witch hunting other duers in the thread who had been defending me. All those duers who are trying to to make lynch mobs or witch hunts acceptable are in the wrong, and making DU suck, in a big way.

When I saw old posts of mine started to be dug up, I knew it was time to lock the thread, before the lynch mob mentality mindset/frenzy of this started attacking fellow duers in the same manner. Which they had already started attacking duers who had and were defending me. It was disgusting.

I now think, more than ever, Warren Stupidity's suggestion of ditching hosts completely makes more sense than ever. The lynch mob mentality is out of control.

boston bean (20,913 posts)

4. How were you able to lock it. I tried to unlock it and it would not allow me any superpowers.

Did Violet unlock it and tell you she had done so, so you could re-lock?

No one attacked Violet, people were unhappy with her locking the thread with no consensus and taking off for 12 hours.

And now, I'm peeved. You do not have consensus to lock that thread. Please unlock it and then self delete it.

quinnox (20,600 posts)

5. No, I will not allow my thread to be used as a staging ground for witch hunts

The thread is locked, and I'm not understanding why you want me to unlock it, and then self delete. In either case, the thread will be locked. As it is now.

boston bean (20,913 posts)

7. No shit, that's why you should have deleted in the first place.

Why the hell won't/didn't you just delete it?

You don't want further posts in the OP, your only option is to delete it. You are abusing your hosting powers at this point. I feel like an end run has been made around hosts here in this group to keep a thread locked that has no consensus. You are not special. If you don't want further posts in your OP you delete. You don't use powers other who are not hosts don't have the power to use.

quinnox (20,600 posts)

10. If admins want that thread to remain open, they can either direct me to unlock it, and I will do so,

or I believe they can over-ride the lock and just unlock it themselves. I think I saw this in the past anyhow. Regardless, if they want me to unlock it, I will happily comply.

But why they, (or anyone for that matter) would want that thread to be opened again, which turned into a cluster-fuck of a lynch mob mentality, with not only me, but other duers who were unwilling to participate in the mob made up as targets, this would be beyond my reasoning.

You are not in charge here. Neither are your fellow gang members who perpetuated this fiasco.

boston bean (20,913 posts)

11. Because you are not king host and you do not get special favors nor do you get to use.

special powers others do not have. You can delete your thread, that is your option. It is a complete matter of principle at this point. An end run, a complete game has been played here. I don't know if you will survive it.

quinnox (20,600 posts)

15. I think admins need to take a serious look at all those who disrupted my thread, and consider if

those duers who formed a lynch mob, and started attacking not just myself, but duers who defended me, if this type of witch hunting that some duers are engaging in, and consider if they are contributing to a positive and friendly atmosphere here at DU. And I mean, every single one of the disruptors.

boston bean (20,913 posts)

20. I do hope they take a close look at that thread to, but for other reasons.

Also, that has nothing to do with you having a host lock your thread after refusing to delete it yourself. Then having that host unlock it without a peep to the rest of the hosts here and you then go and re-lock it.

That sucks. That's gaming the system. That's unethical and is not in good form.

quinnox (20,600 posts)

22. After constantly misrepresenting what I said and did, and being dishonest, you are not one I would

consider to have any credibility when it comes to ethics.

boston bean (20,913 posts)

23. I don't give a shit why you wanted the thread locked.

I give a shit that it was locked without consensus, that you refuse to self delete, and then the locking hosts unlocks so you can re-lock yourself.

That's what's at issue here. Stop with the deflection. Take your lumps. Do the adult thing, unlock your thread, and self delete if you don't want further replies to it.

quinnox (20,600 posts)

26. The thread is locked, which is the end result of self-deleting. You are not making any sense

whatsoever. I will ignore the rude attacks, because I have come to expect them from you.

boston bean (20,913 posts)

28. No it does not resolve this.

You don't get to lock even your own thread without consensus. Your option is to delete your thread if you don't want further replies.

[Sissyk]

87. I think you left out a bit.

This post (see link) was locked by GD Host Violet Crumble at 7:30am eastern this morning

This discussion thread was locked by EarlG (a host of the Forum & Group Hosts group).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025208861

It now shows it has been locked by quinnox.

How the hell did that happen?

Just an FYI for others, all threads having to do with this topic were locked by EarlG.

[maddezmom]

93. EarlG locked others as well

And then a post urging host to work together.

[Sissyk]

95. Yes he did.

Please read the last line of my post.

[maddezmom]

97. Guess what I was trying to say, is he locked others

That had nothing to do with this incident.

[Sissyk]

101. You are correct.

And, that's a good point to make. He locked a few others that had gotten personal.

One of the most important rules in hosting (that we all threw out the damn window the past couple months) is don't make it personal.

backatcha

[MadrasT]

96. I love the hell out of this:

quinnox (20,600 posts)

15. I think admins need to take a serious look at all those who disrupted my thread, and consider if

those duers who formed a lynch mob, and started attacking not just myself, but duers who defended me, if this type of witch hunting that some duers are engaging in, and consider if they are contributing to a positive and friendly atmosphere here at DU. And I mean, every single one of the disruptors.

Oh, the admins took a "serious look" all right... with the correct end result, IMO.

[BainsBane]

114. It certainly shows why he was PPR'd

in pretty clear terms.

[JI7]

122. amazing how such an asshole of that level

Sees himself as the victim.

I only found out he was a host a few days ago and shocked someone like that could be one. And this was before this stuff happened .

Being a host seemed to make him feel like he could get away with more. His frequency of asshole posts increased with more power he got.

[merrily]

103. I don't know the details, but I always respect your opinion on matters.

[DonCoquixote]

76. quinnox finally got banned?

Oh well, I guess he can join others in the Hall of Shame (aka Discussionist.)

[The Magistrate]

55. I Appreciate The Information

And re-state my support and friendship for Ms. Crumble.

[JI7]

17. i don't think it was a mistake on her part

[SidDithers]

22. I agree with you...nt

Sid

[riderinthestorm]

47. + 1 nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. Narcasists tend to, also, be seductive ...

Hopeful she what be fooled again.

[LittleBlue]

20. She's about the most inoffensive person I've ever met on this site

IDK what this thread is all about but I'll support her.

[Purveyor]

23. I've rarely had disagreements with VC and appreciate her posts. I don't

know all of what went on but she is a good poster.

Hang tough Violet Crumble...

[Aerows]

26. She hasn't been PPRed

or restricted from posting.

I will join you in saying that I like her a lot and am glad she is part of our DU community.

[zappaman]

28. Kick and Rec!

She got played.

[McCamy Taylor]

35. Democracy is hard work.

[Kali]

36. I would like to hear from her directly.

I feel she owes the other GD hosts (and DU in general) some kind of explanation.

[hrmjustin]

37. Always loved violet.

[TBF]

49. I was on MIRT w/her and she seemed really nice

and caring towards others.

[IronLionZion]

51. My favorite Aussie

[Sissyk]

54. Where to begin.....

I still have a very heavy heart over my participation in what happened yesterday and today.

First of all, THIS IS NOT DEFENDING QUINNOX. HE WAS THE CAUSE OF HIS OWN BANNING, AND HAS TO DO WITH VIOLET CRUMBLE. I've been accused of being his friend because I left a thread of his open because I could not see a reason against the SOP to lock it. I was accused of being his friend, and hurt or heartbroken, because he was banned. Maybe in one very small way am I sad over it. And that is the fact that a long term member violated the rules and got themselves banned. Again, a long time member was banned. I would even bet that Admin. are a bit sad over it. That doesn't mean we don't know it was his fault.

I was the host that started the thread in the Host Forum. There's been a problem with bucking consensus lately and I left the thread open in order to try to get the GD Host to own up to a mistake, error, or problem. Sunlight, I thought, was the best disenfectant.

I was wrong. I let it get personal and let the flames fly and refused to delete the thread (you can do that in the Host Forum same as in GD). I can be stubborn. I thought I, a lowly member of no regard to anyone, could cause change in a very contentious group. Not.gonna.happen.

I forgot my number one rule of participating in internet message boards or communities. And that is that I DONT KNOW what is going on in the life of the person on the other side of my screen. I don't know what their real life is like, or just what is going on that day.

That means I normally don't read anything into the silence of another member, especially one that I have gotten to know and like. I mean, think about this. Any one that has had conversations with VC knows she is not going to go silent to keep from having an argument. She is not going to run away from someone because.....well, why? She's very outspoken, she wouldn't do that.

Instead, I read words into her silence and so did too many other GD host and Non-Gd Host. The thread got full of "well, she's been mean to me before", "she's done this before" and lots of other non-related things and the thread became a focus on VC and not the thread we were judging on.

When I realized I'd broken my number one rule, I stubbornly thought I could reign the thread back on topic. I ask that all non-GD Host please quit participating so that we could try to work things out. I was then told it wasn't the first time non-GD Host were trying to tell others, that were just as concerned, to STFU. Yes, I tried to tell them to STFU, I reckon. But, it didn't work anyway. The thread the became about the times they were disrespected by GD Host and told to STFU.

Anyway, I lost my way and helped to throw a good person, and good member, under the bus. Why? Because she locked a Goddamn thread and didn't stick around to argue with me and others about it. She kept me waiting.....all damn day!!!111!!! (It was the middle of the night in Australia) How Dare She??? I see now that that is why we threw a good person under the bus.

So, I'm here to take the blame for all of DU throwing a good person under the bus. I ask your forgiveness. VC has graciously given me that.

I'm still sad, and mad at myself. Mad that I let myself get caught up in the actions against this woman and even led the way.

I hope this all makes sense. I'm not a very good writer but I wanted to try.

[stevenleser]

58. Hmmm. I didn't intend this OP to hash out what happened, but this helps fill in a lot. Thanks

And I don't know about anyone else but I was moved by your sincere regret about how things played out and whatever small part you had in it (I think you are being hard on yourself.)

[Sissyk]

59. Thanks for that.

But, it's up to me to be hard on myself. That's the only way we learn.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

61. Thank you for this post. n/t

[Sissyk]

65. You're welcome.

This is in support of VC.

[Behind the Aegis]

63. I think you are over-analyzing.

You and VC were not, IMO, and from what I read, acting in bad faith!! You were acting to the best of your abilities as hosts, which is what you are supposed to do. If mistakes were made, there were honest in intent, whereas, others, IMO, were acting out of malice and bad faith.

Violet and I do not always see eye to eye, especially when it comes to the Israeli-Arab conflict, and there are a few times I disagreed with her decisions in regards to some alerts, but as a host (and a member of MIRT), she has never acted maliciously or in bad faith. She puts aside her preferences and ideology when it comes to her role as a host, and that is exactly what a host is supposed to do.

More than a few hosts (and in the past, MIRT) have abused those positions with their partisanship positions. You and VC have never done that in my recollection! It is one thing to get sucked in to a "meta vortex," it is quite another to use the position of host/MIRT to enact revenge, and it has happened.

I am sure a little piece of hell has frozen over, so I will say no more lest both sides decide to attack me.

[Sissyk]

64. Thank you for this!

It means a lot coming from you.

I didn't want this thread to become about me (as I'm sure you know, this is mostly for others) so I really thought about just letting it slide by and only recommend the thread. Then I thought, no, sissyk; you need to own up to your part. So I did.

I wanted those that are not "in the know" to see that VC really didn't do anything wrong and surely not something that has been done plenty of times before. Even by some of those in the other thread (and this one) wanting to hear from VC before they decide to support her or not.

She has my support. That's what I wanted to get across along with my actions in the host forum.

I thank you for being a friend even though we don't always agree. That's what friends, and fellow members, are suppose to do, right?

I hope things are well in Okieville

[BainsBane]

71. I have very limited knowledge of what goes on in the hosts forum

but I have read all the copies of threads posted in GD, and I will say you stood out above many others as principled in your comments. You seemed to be trying to be fair based on uniform standards rather than your view of this or that poster.

[Sissyk]

83. Thank you.

But, this isn't about my principles.

It is about the way VC was treated.

[Hekate]

73. Wow. Thank you for all of that, Sissyk. Best wishes to both you and VioletCrumble.

What a world.

[Sissyk]

85. Thank you.

Let's hope she comes back and maybe we can put this behind us.

[hfojvt]

74. the hosts forum sounds a little bit like meta

but a private meta, I guess.

[Warren Stupidity]

81. I agree with this post.

Violet got caught in a mess, she probably shouldn't have acted on her own, but really it was not the end of the world.

I too regret that a long time DU'er got banned. I disagreed with quinnox on many issues, but I do not think he was just a "troll" who posted here for more than a decade only to stir shit up. What he did over the last few days was a deliberate crash and burn: his banning was inevitable, but he was one of us, a long time DU'er, a member of our community.

[Sissyk]

86. Thank you, Warren.

She did get caught up in a mess that was way over blown.

I mean, it was a thread. One locked thread out of 1000s of threads.

[Violet_Crumble]

89. I think yr being way too hard on yrself and you don't have anything to take the blame for...

That stuff yr blaming yrself for? I've done similar things in the past getting caught up in stuff, and I bet many others have too. Yr a great host and after working with you in MIRT, you've shown that yr a really good and honest person. You showed heaps of integrity yesterday, imo, and yr one of the good guys at DU. Y'know, there's only two people to blame for what happened. Quinnox for stuffing round with the hosts and the hosting system, and me for being stupid and falling into a trap I'd normally be wise enough to avoid...

[Sissyk]

90. Thank you, VC!

I hope the support shown you here warms your heart a bit.

[rhett o rick]

91. I appreciate your post and I believe VC will also.

You are not to blame. Those that are aren't apologizing.

Violet is a decent person and didn't/doesn't deserve to be treated as she was.

Thanks again for your kind post.

[Sissyk]

94. Thanks, rhett.

All I can do is speak for me.

I took this opportunity that steven gave us to make my peace while giving support for VC, and I did so.

[JTFrog]

115. The one to blame can't apologize.

He's been banned.

[merrily]

118. He had support on some of those threads from people who are not banned

and also not apologizing.

I don't mean to grave dance, but, after reading some of the threads just now, I am very curious as to why he was a host to begin with. Hides threads about Obama, a very sick DUer and women's issues, and then starts a thread to help others hide threads about women's issues?

Look, I am often critical of Obama, but I wouldn't dream of hiding threads about the President on a political message board.

Did people really buy that this was a Democrat?

[rhett o rick]

123. If only. But those that trashed VC are responsible for their own actions and haven't been

banned and haven't apologized and in fact some of them are still trashing her.

[merrily]

102. A wise woman instructed me to give forgiveness when someone asks for it,

even if I don't believe they need forgiveness.

So, if it helps at all, I like VC very much and I forgive you.

[Sissyk]

104. Thank you, merrily.

[merrily]

108. You're most welcome.

Beating up oneself gets exhausting. (As an old, sexist commercial used to say, "Ask the man who owns one.&quot

I recommend that you save beating up on yourself for when you steal a poor person's food or lie a country into war. something on those levels.

[Sissyk]

109. Oh, I'm finished beating up myself!

However, it wasn't for nothing. I learned a lesson.

I believe that the only way to learn lesssons is to look inside yourself (beat up or question yourself) and come to terms with your mistakes (minor as in this one, or major in life).

People can beat up on another all day long and it's not doing anything except making them dig their heels in deeper and have to defend themselves. If someone has to spend all that time defending themselves, there's no time to stop and consider if their outlook on an issue is right or wrong or somewhere in between.

[merrily]

111. Good for you on both counts.

I was unaware of all this until I saw this thread. I am trying to catch up by reading some of the relevant threads.

Odd that an OP about someone cutting his lip shaving could have devolved to this.

Guess we all have some lessons to learn.

Interesting, too, to see that hosts can posted to each other in a way that might well result in a hides if we posted to each other that way. Sometimes, it's not good to look behind the curtain.

[Sissyk]

116. Yes, it was all over a thread about shaving.

That still blows my mind. And, as others have said. VC locking it even though concensus to do so was definetly not there, it was blown all out of proportion. Lesson learned.

No, you can not get a hide for saying some very ugly things in the Host Forum. A lot would be hidden here in GD, or in the majority of the groups, that get a pass in hosting.

You can alert abuse on a post in hosting and it will go to the Admin. with your explanation of why it was hidden. As far as I know though (with the exception of quinnox and one or two others a long time ago) no one has been banned, or removed from hosting due to an alert.

When you read the other threads, please note only what the host said. Not what some are putting in their mouths. Read it as if you are giving the person the benefit of the doubt, because that is the right thing to do.

Thanks for the converation, merrily. I don't think we've talked before. And, guess what? We are not throwing anyone under the bus, putting words in their mouths (lord, I should go back and read my replys before I say that), or SHOUTING AT EACH OTHER!!!! I like that.

[merrily]

117. I have enjoyed it as well, sissyk.

No, we did not throw anyone under a bus or do anything else uncalled for.

I never get personally insulting--at least not intentionally--with a poster who has not personally insulted me first--and most often, on that very same thread. (I try not to carry a grudge from one thread to another, but I don't always succeed.)

And, if I suspect someone of being a paid poster, that poster is likely to get under my skin more easily than other posters.

The rest of the time, I just express my opinion or provide some info and links I think relevant.

[Texasgal]

137. *this* is exactly why

so many people refuse to volunteer to host. It's absolutely a cluster fuck and silly all the way around.

I'm sorry, I say screw the hosting system. The drama is insipid. I don't blame ANYONE for not wanting to be part of this drama.

UGH.

[Ken Burch]

56. please pm me about whatever happened. n/t.

[bravenak]

57. I feel like she was manipulated by a charismatic friend.

I have always liked her.

[rhett o rick]

206. I think saying "she was manipulated by a charismatic friend" isn't the best way to clear her name.

I know you have good intentions, but it sounds to me like damning with faint praise.

I don't know but doubt very much that he was her "friend". And the term "friend" in this case, when associated with a "troll" has been used as a pejorative kinda like "apologist".

And IMO VC is a big girl and not easily "manipulated". In fact she has taken responsibility for her actions which, IMO, were to try to end the feeding frenzy. The fact that her action failed is no more her fault than those that used it to continue the feeding frenzy and try to drag her into the chaos.

And with regard to manipulation, I think it is crazy-ironic that those that went overboard with their dozens and dozens of posts, in multiple threads, repeating the same things over and over, accusing those that tried to calm the situation of "helping a friend", claiming that the "troll" was here to disrupt......don't realize that if that was his goal, they helped him succeed.

VC was unfairly accused and some have apologized and some are still holding out.

I appreciate your kind words for her.

[seabeyond]

209. i stopped reading at "feeding frenzy" and this is the insult to duers. a troll, we were all mostly

aware of, recognizing his sexism and racism, his passive aggressive manipulation on dismissing very real, very valid, very important issues and duers challenging this man his misogyny. over 50 different people challenging this man in anger at his sexist, racist trolling. then to throw in a ill member into the mix for no reason at all, but being an ass.

and you calling the posters a feeding frenzy

violet doing the same and pushing it even further saying people having a valid anger were using the man as a tool

is fuckin insulting.

why do you not get it?

my question would be, when a man starts an Op immediately after the hobby lobby decision to

DISMISS the ruling as unimportant
then an OP telling women to strip down and protest on a thread for men to play, degrading women, jumping up and down, boobies.
then start an OP saying women were being hysterical,
to finally do an OP stating trash hobby lobby threads, that is how important it is

why YOU were not in there or violet or any of the others that chooses to blame duers calling a troll out, why you were not in there doing the same.

[Jack Rabbit]

60. Violet was one of the personalities on Foreign Affairs (I/P) forum many years ago

. . . when I spent a few months as moderator there. She was one of those people who could state her views clearly and forcefully and still didn't cross the line too often. For some people, on both sides of the issue, crossing the line was as natural as breathing.

[DreamGypsy]

62. My wife is Australian. Her favorite was Violet Crumble...

because it's the way that shatters that matters



though after many years in the U.S. she has become fond of



Since Mary See has not been ejected from discourse on DU, I'll add my shout of support for VC.

[StevieM]

67. I am totally confused by this whole thing

How does one go about locking a thread? And why is it a bad thing if someone does that?

I honestly don't know. I just never concerned myself too much with that stuff. The other day someone had to explain to me how the ignore feature works and why people use it.

[steve2470]

68. only a General Discussion host can lock a thread in here

The Admins can, also. I'll leave the "bad" explanation to a GD host.

[StevieM]

69. Who is a GD host? Is that like an Administrator? (eom)

[steve2470]

70. they are members who have chosen to host this forum

They can lock threads that don't conform to the GD Statement of Purpose. If you click this link http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1002 you can read their names and more about this forum.

[Warren DeMontague]

72. I like VC. She & I butted heads our first MIRT term together and came to mutually respect each other

(At least I know the respect runs from me to her. )

I will also respect the intent to stay away from the details but I do feel compelled to add that over the past few years I gave seen some incidents of FAR more egregious and deliberate abuses of the hosting function by individuals who neither expressed contrition, or received anything close to the level of approbation, which has come down on her over this.

Odd, that.

Anyway, cheers violet.

[maddezmom]

77. Agree with you

Hope she comes back soon. We don't always a free but she is a good DU'er.

[LeftishBrit]

79. I am quite sure that VC acted in good faith. As indeed did SissyK.

VC and I have posted together on and off on one of DU's most contentious forums for 7 years now. We've sometimes agreed and sometimes disagreed. Agree or disagree, I have always found her honest. If she has a problem with someone, or something they've said, she will tell them so openly - NOT run away or attempt to cover her tracks in any way.

Just as has occasionally happened with me, I think that on this occasion VC came up against the problem of being in a very different time-zone from most of DU. It was night-time in Australia when much of this was going on.

While I don't know SissyK as well as I do VC, I would say the same of her: she is honest and direct, and was also being manipulated by a champion game-player.

To be truthful, I think that the hosts, and many non-hosts, have been played like fiddles (including people who are not usually easily deceived or manipulated) and the 'violinist' here is the one who was recently TS'd.

[KittyWampus]

84. Violet Crumble, you have lots of support. You were doing your very best

in a difficult situation.

Someone was determined to take advantage of you and the system.

They were the problem, not you.

[Violet_Crumble]

88. Okay, reading through most of this thread was a humbling experience...

Thanks to all of you who said such nice things that I'm not sure I deserve.

The reality is I screwed up, made a bad judgment call, and jumped the wrong way when faced with a situation in the hosts forum I hadn't had to handle before. Without rehashing something that's been flogged to death in GD and the hosts forum, I did what I thought at the time was the right thing to do. I wasn't doing any favour for a friend, coz me and Quinnox weren't friends and night before last was the first time he's ever PM'd me. I would have done it at that moment in time for anyone. I unlocked it the next morning and let him know I'd unlocked it and he could self-delete if he wanted to when I was on my way out to deal with stuff that really matters, which was family stuff. But no way was I going to post in a hosts thread where I felt like I was being tried and convicted of kicking the cutest puppy in the world to death. Call me a coward, accuse me of hiding, but I call it using my common sense for the first time in that whole thing and staying away from a bit of a feeding frenzy. I stuffed up, I reversed my stuff up which is what people wanted me to do, and had no idea that quinnox would relock the thread. That's because I can't recall ever seeing that happen before. End result. Quinnox is gone, I'm feeling pretty sore and stupid, and I got to see in 24hrs a bit of ugliness at DU and then some of the good that's kept me coming back to DU for over 10 years even though my normal attention span for anything online is less than 24hrs (guitar tab sites, the Pearl Jam website, and watching cute Spoon clips on YouTube are excluded).

So, I'm moving on, but not before I get all nostalgic at seeing some veterans from the old I/P forum, and not before I tell Mr DeMontague that maybe just possibly I do respect him, but I have no respect for his taste in music.

[MadrasT]

98. Violet_Crumble

I respect the hell out of this post.

but I call it using my common sense for the first time in that whole thing and staying away from a bit of a feeding frenzy

Good call.

[rhett o rick]

99. Welcome back VC. I hope you won't let your treatment discourage you from hosting.

We need good hosts like yourself.

[steve2470]

100. excellent post and commendable attitude nt

[OKNancy]

105. glad you posted. I hope the people who slammed you are shamed

I can vouch that you are no friend of quinnox or supported what he was doing.
I think some people who were pushing hard to humiliate you were doing so for things that had nothing to do with this thread.

Also... it was so blown out of proportion. It was/is ridiculous.

[IdaBriggs]

106. I'm sorry things went down the way they did.

Thank you for trying to Not Make DU Suck.

[cyberswede]

110. Thanks for posting.

I'm glad you shared your perspective. Maybe now everyone can move on (till the next big kerfuffle - lol).

[maddezmom]

113. Good to see you back

Hope the folks that read into your motives read this post. Fwiw, never saw you and quinnox as nothing more than fellow hosts. Hope we all can just move on.

[merrily]

119. Glad you are still here, VC.

End result. Quinnox is gone,

But VC isn't. From what I've been reading as I've been trying to figure out what happened, those two are the correct end results. Sorry you got hurt in the process, though.

[Warren DeMontague]

121. HA!

Good answer.

At least, 98% of it.

[CreekDog]

124. I appreciate that you addressed the issue

I do blame quinnox and his trolling first and foremost. It certainly was effective.

That said, one thing lost in all this is that many regular DUers out here in the forums blamed the GD hosts for yours' and quinnox's actions. Considering the GD hosts were nearly universally opposed to what you and he did, that you did it acting as a host, that they got blamed for action you took is really unfair and one you should have foreseen.

Second, EarlG's message to the hosts clearly blames a lot of hosts for all the drama that erupted, in other words, they got blamed for the disruption you caused when you acted in bad faith as host (and then left).

I have to say, they are really nice people because frankly, they took it on the chin from users and admins for what you did (yes, mostly quinnox, but he couldn't have done it without your help) and they are mostly very magnanimous towards this explanation and apparent apology.

[boston bean]

152. I have to agree with you here. How the person that broke hosting rules

becomes the victim, while others who point it out become the bad guys, is really twisted.

I like violet, it did seem to be out of character, but I alerted her within 10 minutes of her locking that thread that it was going to cause havoc in the hosts forum. You don't lock thread without some sort of agreement, and the thread was already a leave by hosts of GD when she decided on her own to lock by a request/pm from quinnox. Her reasoning for doing so was because she felt that if he deleted it, it would cause him more trouble. I don't know exactly what their private emails were about, but that is what she stated as a reason for locking. He had already stated in the thread in question he was never going to delete it. This whole thing could have been avoided had the etiquette of hosting been followed. The persons who were upset that action was taken are not bullies, not out to get her, and are not the bad guy. They were trying to keep things on track and be fair to other DU members, who do not have the liberty of friendly hosts locking their posts out of embarrassment or locking their own posts. Making it look like the hosts had a problem with it. They have to delete. That is their only option.

It's twisted beyond belief. I tried my best to keep it on topic and not personal. I tried to alert her to the error very quickly and there was no response for a full 12 hours. The next response from her come tto find out was that she unlocked (quietly) without alerting the hosts of GD and he had re-locked himself. Those actions are what put this gaming of the system into action. It was those actions that disrupted the hosts forum. Not those pointing out the gaming.

[SidDithers]

155. +1...

The Host who, innocently or maliciously, abused her Hosting privileges is not the victim here.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

157. So are you saying that maybe VC will be the next "house-keeping" project? Don't you

guys have anything else to do but monitor DU and alert and "house-keep" people?

[SidDithers]

158. No, that's not what I'm saying...

That's what you're saying I'm saying.

It's a bad habit that you have, putting words in other peoples' mouths. It's something that no liberal democrat would do.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

159. I think what you guys did and are continuing to do with regard to VC is low. But it seems

just part of the game you call "house-keeping".

[SidDithers]

160. No, that's not at all what I said...

I don't think that abuse of Hosting privileges is at all the same as housekeeping. And I don't think that a liberal democrat would get the two confused either.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

161. How would you know what a liberal Democrat would do? What VC did was one event

and she tried to fix it and has admitted her error. But that's not enough for you guys is it? And it's kinda funny that when another host in GD was unilaterally locking threads left and right at the apparent direction of a certain group of non-GD hosts, it was just ok with you. Of course he was one of your guys. You seem to be only interested in "house-keeping" those that you dont agree with.

[SidDithers]

162. I know what a liberal democrat is because you continually tell me what one would do and not do...

Which is why I'm so surprised to see you trying to put words in my mouth, and accusing me of doing things that I haven't done. Those are obviously things that no liberal democrat would do.



Sid

[rhett o rick]

163. I will give you credit for being clever. But your "house-keeping" stinks. nm

[BainsBane]

169. I don't know what your obsession wtih "house-keeping" is

But you seem to have invented it from whole cloth. You used it against both me and Sid, while neither of mentioned anything of the kind. No one said a thing about getting rid of Violet. What an absurd accusation and frankly just plain strange.

[SidDithers]

170. Rick likes to accuse people who alert for SOP of practicing censorship...

I've often countered that enforcing the Statement of Purpose for General Discussion - locking threads that are off-topic - isn't censorship, it's housekeeping.

Why he's gone off accusing me of wanting to "housekeep" Violet is something only he can answer.



Sid

[BainsBane]

171. Oh, I see

Well he used it against me in a rather odd rant in another thread. I don't recall using that term myself, and certainly not in the context of this discussion.

[SidDithers]

172. No worries. But only he knows why he says the things he says...

Sid

[PeaceNikki]

168. WHAT?? Do tell.

"A host in GD was unilaterally locking threads left and right at the apparent direction of a certain group of hosts"

I must have missed some big bannings over abuse like that!

[PeaceNikki]

173. C'mon, rhett, spill the beans!!! Who was caught doing this?

You can't just lob shit into the forum like that. Someone must have been banned if there was proof of such a thing, no?

[BainsBane]

174. Don't you think if anyone had

someone else would know about it?

[PeaceNikki]

185. Exactly. I think Rhett o Rick is just making that up.

Since Rick won't answer, I just asked EarlG about it in his tired in the hosts forum.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

215. What was the answer?

[rhett o rick]

219. You are one ornery ....er something or other. nm

[bluesbassman]

135. Since serving a couple terms on MIRT with you, I have always seen you as fair and objective.

I also appreciate your candor and this post reflects that quality. Things happen and it's generally a sign of character how one des with the aftermath. You have shown yours to be quality, and is what I would expect.

Take what lesson from this experience you feel beneficial and do move on, but hopefully as a contributing DU member as your voice is needed and appreciated here.

[kdmorris]

149. Hang in there!

I used one of my rare DU "me times" to say this

Now back to chasing toddlers...

[snooper2]

112. DAAAAAAAAAAAA-RAMA!

This place can be like hanging out in the parking lot after bingo night

[DonCoquixote]

127. Bottom line is

We need to be careful not to attack our own so easily, because the Trolls know we do it well, and then they go to other sites and start pouring the champagne and lighting the cigars. Let's face it, chances are that Quinnox and others are going to other sites (like one that rhymes with "malfunctionist&quot and stitching together the latest version of a sock puppet. The difference being, they did not get their scalp yet.

[BainsBane]

128. They've got one

and are bragging about it the other thread.

[DonCoquixote]

131. oh really?

kindly pm.

[ellenrr]

132. I like Violet. What happened to her? nt

[Texasgal]

136. I've always enjoyed Violets

posts! I think she's a great DU'er.

[morningfog]

139. Read the SoP. This is not GD material.

Whining about DU, meta post.

[Go Vols]

140. Cats and guns

aren't allowed per the SOP either,but ...

[stevenleser]

141. You tried your SOP alert and the hosts rejected it. Move on. nt

[morningfog]

143. I knew the hosts wouldn't lock. They are worthless

against posters who ignore the SoP. It's a flaw of DU.

[uppityperson]

145. Hosts can only rule on the original post, which was not whining but in support of a DUer

"meta" is also not necessarily against SOP, only whining and making DU suck. And again, Hosts job is to judge the OP, not the replies.

[BainsBane]

146. If I had been a host I wouldn't have locked this either

It isn't whining about DU. It's the opposite. (And VC and I ain't exactly pals. I just don't see a thing wrong with expressing support for a host or member).

[Violet_Crumble]

148. Point of order!

Heh, I just wanted to get yr attention in a dramatic way!

I just wanted to say that yr correct that we're not exactly pals, but I'm not sure you know or believe that we're not exactly enemies either. I'm kinda happy with being in the middle ground of not being an enemy or a pal, and it'd be really cool if you were on that middle ground with me

[BainsBane]

153. I'm happy to try

[Violet_Crumble]

147. This GD host has a question for you...

I don't think we know each other, so I know the reason you alerted and are now complaining about it isn't about me. But why is it that you alerted on this one and haven't alerted on any of the other support/appreciation OPs that have been peppered through GD today? I'm not getting it. Why would this thread really annoy you, but not the others?

btw, GD hosts generally do leave OPs that are supportive of other DUers if they're positive ones. They'll sometimes lock ones that grow out of some meta-battle that are having a go at another DUer, and ones like calling for the nuking of other DUers or whining about jury results nearly always end up locked (sometimes by admin if we're being distracted like we were during a busy period a few weeks ago). The hosts voted to leave this one, and I stayed out of it and didn't vote coz for once it was All About Me. That's coz it was positive and not whining about DU. I'll be voting to leave if there are alerts on any of the other threads in GD right now for the same reason, that they're not negative and intended to disrupt.

[rhett o rick]

164. I think it's inappropriate to trash hosts. Not all host decisions are consistent because

there often are different hosts at different times with different opinons. Host try their best and it doesn't help things to trash them in GD.

[seabeyond]

165. i think it is inappropriate for hosts to trash duers.

a host claimed those upset in that thread, and challenged quinnox, used an ill man as a tool

pretty uncivil (sigh), right?

it works both ways.

violet owned it. she saw certain names, and i would guess that clouded her judgment. she owned it. and she is done.

it appears most all the duers on this thread have put it in the proper place.

[rhett o rick]

167. I agree. No one in DU should be trashing anyone. There are still a few above that are

still blaming her and it makes me uneasy.

[morningfog]

177. Open the hosting forum so we can read and decide.

Otherwise, it looks arbitrary and pointless.

[rhett o rick]

181. Read and decide what? nm

[BainsBane]

183. You know, transparency, democracy

Shining a light on secret government. Holding officials accountable. Just the sort of thing you claim to support.

[rhett o rick]

190. Like the MIRT discussions? nm

[BainsBane]

192. Sure, why not?

Along with hosting discussions. All of those sections of the site could be made read only. MIRT might be more problematic because of the information having it open would provide to repeat trolls, but it's possible. I didn't used to think that was good idea, but now that I see what's been going on behind the scenes, having at least the hosts discussion open for members to read would provide an incentive for hosts to be fairer.

[morningfog]

187. Whether there is any basis for decisions.

This is simple. The SOP is simple. How are hosts making the decisions? Rather, how are they NOT making their decisions?

[rhett o rick]

189. I dont have a problem with the host's discussions being open

Last edited Sun Jul 13, 2014, 10:19 AM - Edit history (1)

to everyone, if we enforce the rule that hosts and host decisions can not be trashed. The process isn't set up to allow everyone to vote on every decision. This isn't a democratic process anymore than our government is. The Admins have hosts that evaluate alerted OP's to help them enforce the SOP. And IMO the Admins have stressed that the default ruling for alerts is to LEAVE and we don't Lock unless there is a consensus to lock. Therefore, a lot of alerts end with the OP being left AS, IMO, THE ADMINS WISH. If posters don't like that, then take it up with the Admin and don't trash the hosts. I wish jurors would recognize that trashing anyone on DU is a violation of CS, especially hosts.

I edited this because when I reread it the next day, it was a lot more snark than appropriate.

[morningfog]

191. LOL. The GD Hosts are worthless and don't do jack.

I am curious what they post about, I think we should be permitted to see how non-decisions are made.

Because the GD SoP is not enforced. That is a fact that cannot be denied. So, what do Hosts talk about when they receive an alert? Are you afraid of a little transparency.

Your use of the word bully is absolutely laughable.

[Agschmid]

194. You realize you could see right now...

No waiting I swear to you.

Sign up to be a host, help us do what we do... then maybe with your insight we won't just do "jack".

Right now you can be a host of these main forums immediately...

Welcome & Help: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1256
Good Reads: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1016
Video & Multimedia: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1017
Politics 2014: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1251

By hosting you do two things, help make the DU community a "better" place and also you'd get to see what it is we are talking about while we GD host. It's really not that big of a mystery, and it's really not all that jaded.

I encourage you to try it out, maybe you can help us make some "non-decisions".

[BainsBane]

196. Here's what confused me the short time I was a host

I hosted the Gun Control Reform Activism group, not GD. I didn't go into GD and tell people what I thought about stuff because I wasn't a GD host, but I saw other people do it all the time. The one time I posted a thread about an SOP concern in my group, other people who don't even post in that group jumped in. Their views were counter to the three hosts of the gun control group, who all agreed on a lock, so I simply ignored them.

If someone signs up to host Good Reads, their job is Good Reads, not GD. Isn't it? How could she appropriately help make decisions about GD? I can see an advantage to signing up just to see what is going on, but other than that, unless she gets on the waiting list for GD, hosting decisions in this forum aren't hers. Am I wrong?

[Agschmid]

199. Nope...

It's my understanding of the system that if your are a host of a certain forum, you really only can drive consensus decisions for that forum. That being said if Skinner didn't want people to provide input across all the groups/forums he likely would have set up forum hosting differently, where you were blind to the actions of other hosts. (Clearly I can't speak for him).

I know I personally don't mind the feedback and input others have, but your right it doesn't mean I'll agree with it or use that input when reaching consensus.

When I responded to the previous poster they were asking for transparency, my suggestion to join as a host of another forum/group would give them that transparency immediately. Does that make sense?

[morningfog]

197. I only have an issue with GD.

[Agschmid]

198. Well then this will help...

General Discussion: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1002

Sure seems like there are quite a few people interested in doing "jack". You mentioned in your previous post you wanted transparency it was my suggestion you could have that transparency immediately, by joining one of those other forums as a host an occasionally helping out there.

If that doesn't interest you there is nothing I can do to help you.

[Violet_Crumble]

201. I only have an issue with the Music Appreciation Group.

I know. It's a weird issue to have, but there it is. It's not as debilitating as my issue with spiders, but I know I have to overcome it or I could end up listening to crappy 60's music my entire life. Maybe you and me could ask Skinner to start a self-help Group for DUers who have issues with only one group or forum?

[X_Digger]

207. Results of your Jury Service

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

A really passive aggressive insulting, snarky post. Since Violet Crumble is one of two that started this whole thing, it is unfortunate she decides to jump in with passive aggressive insults.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jul 13, 2014, 10:12 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 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: Get a grip.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh for fuck's sake. Put on your big girl pants and stop abusing the alert system.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If you don't like a person IGNORE them, scroll right on by their comments; but for the love of wobbling Jesus STOP these malicious targeted alerts. There is no reason this should have been alerted on except this person now has a target on their back. Grow the hell up ffs.

I was one of the two snarky responses.

[one_voice]

210. Hmmm...silly alert imo.

I was on that jury as well.

[RiffRandell]

213. Jesus Fucking Christ.

[one_voice]

216. Shocked they didn't suggest she be banned...

edited to add: dear jury...that's sarcasm.

[rhett o rick]

200. Good reply. I tend to over react when people trash hosts in GD. nm

[NYC_SKP]

204. I believe one has to have a star to be a host.

And that only takes a couple dollars.

Some like to "contribute" in different ways.

[Agschmid]

205. You are correct, I overlooked that.

Thanks for pointing it out, I know when I was broke and still wanted a star I contributed to get it... even if it was a small amount (sorry Skinner, etc.)

Well I'd be happy to share any insights still with that particular poster if they'd like.

[BainsBane]

193. Could say the same thing about the NSA

If they wanted the people's input, they would have made us (or you) National Security Director, only they didn't.

All anyone expects is even-handed decision making rather than hosts making not even caring that they don't have a reason for their decisions. You obviously object to that a great deal. You go on and on endlessly about transparency in government, yet insist none of it should apply to you.

[rhett o rick]

202. I wouldn't have a problem with GD Host's Forum being open to all to see if there was a

strong rule against harassing the hosts if they don't abide by certain poster's wishes. The alert system can be abused to lock/hide discussions that some here don't like at the expense of an open message board. The host's job is to enforce the SOP as they interpret it. Not everyone interprets it the same and that's why we have host discussions and work toward's and that's why there is some inconsistencies. At any given time during the day and night we will get different make-ups of hosts and their consensus' can vary. Some don't like that because they want iron-clad rules and enforcement. That's not that easy on a liberal message board and IMO that's a good thing. As I understand it hosts are to default to the Leave status rather than Locking everything. Some here get very upset if the hosts don't lock everything they alert on.

IMO no one should be allowed to "strongly influence" the hosts. If DU posters don't like the decisions in GD Hosting, they should take it up with the Admins and NOT drag it into GD for a feeding frenzy.

If you want to discuss the NSA you can usually find me in threads intended for those discussions.

[BainsBane]

211. I don't disagree with that

What I disagree with is operating based on who one likes or doesn't like vs. the SOP of the forum. I don't think you all realize how much more work arbitrary enforcement of rules causes you. I have no idea what the SOP of GD is anymore, since it is so seldom enforced. Meta became commonplace ages ago. If that's the situation, fine, but then why do hosts suddenly argue a post should be locked based on Meta? If I knew Meta were prohibited, I wouldn't post it. Same with guns. I haven't posted gun posts since the exemption was closed, but I see some get through and not others. The distinction between lounge and GD no longer seems to exist. Whereas the prohibition on entertainment explicitly written in the SOP never appears to be enforced, that I can tell. All of that results in more questionable threads you all have to deal with. If the rules were enforced consistently, it would be a lot easier to tell what is and isn't allowed.

[rhett o rick]

212. You have very valid questions. The very concept of getting a small group out

of 20 hosts and having them all agree is crazy but not bad. There are often different different points of view and they get discussed and we hopefully come to a consensus. The results will be different from time to time and that's not bad. If a post you want locked doesn't get locked, it isn't the end of the world as some seem to think. It certainly isn't bad enough to start harassing hosts. As I see it, the troubles started in GD Host's forum when non-GD Hosts would jump in 2 or 3 or 4 at a time and try to "strongly encourage" the GD Hosts in their decisions. While giving opinions can be helpful, turning the host forum into a meta feeding frenzy is not.

While I agree that you have valid questions, I recommend you address them to the Admins and not take it out on GD Hosts.

[BainsBane]

214. I did address them to the administrators

in an ATA post. I specifically asked for clarification of the rules for Meta posts in GD. The question was not answered. I simply want to know what the rules are so I don't violate them. I don't think that is too much to ask.

Meta posts are common place, while an alerter indicated that my post about gendered language was not only Meta and therefore prohibited, but proved I deserved to be PPR'd. A number of hosts agreed that my thread should be locked. The thread wasn't locked, but I was a bit taken aback by the suggestion there was something grievous about Meta threads in the first place, given how we see dozens everyday. I don't know how people could vote to hide a thread based on Meta, while allowing dozens of others, with absolutely no sense that they were willfully imposing a double-standard. I don't know how it's possible not to think about such things, or perhaps it's simply that they don't care and truly believe a hosts position is to allow free reign to people or subjects they like and crack down on those they don't. I have no idea what people are thinking, but I find it bizarre. I do know that if I exercised a position of authority in that way, I couldn't look myself in the mirror.

We all have biases. That is part of the human condition. My approach while on MIRT was to try to make my biases explicit rather than to pretend I didn't have any. My doing so has since been used against me out in the regular forums, and those Meta statements I used repeated as some sort of indictment of me. Some people clearly see self-reflection as a sign of weakness that provides an opportunity to attack others and have no compunctions whatsoever about operating based on personal animus. Clearly I see it differently.

[rhett o rick]

217. The decisions from the GD Hosts will differ depending on who is in the

the Hosts Forum at any given time. I think what you see as a double standard is really just inconsistency brought about by the variety of different hosts.

My bottom line is that host decisions should be dragged into GD for using as feeding frenzy bait. And no host should be trashed.

[BainsBane]

218. I might have believed that

before I saw the discussions involving the very same hosts.

[NYC_SKP]

195. I voted not to hide your reply.

GD hosting is a hot mess, but I think you are refreshingly sane in your decisions, even if we don't agree in every instance.

[rhett o rick]

203. Thank you, and I would say the same back at you. Maintaining person sanity is my goal.

I sometimes let my emotions get involved, especially when I see others getting ridiculed and harassed. That's not behavior that I expect of "politically liberal" posters here in DU.

All I ask is that we use the processes we have and stop trashing other DU posters, all DU posters, even if we are positive they are a troll. When we allow "justified" trashing we can see that it's a slippery slope as the justification is subjective and now, for example, apparently* we are allowing trashing of hosts.

*I am guessing that this post which obviously is trashing GD Hosts http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025219338#post191
is being allowed to stand because a jury decided to leave it. If so, it would seem to indicate that trashing hosts is not considered rude and inappropriate. (I am assuming it's been alerted on. I hope so, but didn't myself because I want to see if anyone else thinks it's a violation of CS)

[Rex]

176. Time to let it go, this forum is now GD/META

They might as well change the rules now.

[morningfog]

178. They have changed the rules, by not enforcing them.

[Rex]

180. Then they are changed, officially or unofficially.

I personally have nothing against positive META threads, they are by nature GD. No whining, no callouts. I personally can live with that, but I do see your point...been down that road as a host before...this place was a madhouse when DU3 first started up, the rules fluctuated a lot and we lost an entire forum because we couldn't be nice to each other in public.

Still, things change.

[rhett o rick]

182. Are you complaining about the GD Hosts? It's getting to be an old record. nm

[mercuryblues]

151. me too

If it wasn't for her locking an OP against the host consensus, then unlocking it at the same time for Qx to relock it. Pretty amazing timing there. A certain poster most likely would not have been banned.

My hat off to her. She helped accomplish what his racist posts could not.

Thanks VC

[A-Schwarzenegger]

175. A fresh perspective!

[mercuryblues]

184. let's face it

If he was banned for things he said, that would have happened a long time ago. When he abused the hosting and jury system is when he got banned. The special treatment he got from a host helped him along in the process.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

188. I unequivocabally do not disagree.

[RiffRandell]

166. She's awesome!

DU is lucky to have her.

[Rex]

179. When someone is sick or their family has a tragedy, they come in here and tell us.

And most of us support them, reply, give them a rec, send positive vibes. Like sending positive vibes to Japan right now. I think as long as the META is positive, it is productive.

No call out threads. That would be my one and only rule. And asking where someone is, isn't a call out. Posting about fellow travels with other DUers is META and GD as it gets. I like reading about when DUers meet up and have a great time. That is META, but it is about DU and GD in and of itself.

I have no problems with the positive META threads, they are good for people.

[Autumn]

186. Well done, well done indeed and thank you.

[Kurska]

208. I've mixed it up with her many time and even had some heated arguments. She is a great human being.

She made a mistake, but I have no doubt in my mind that she did what she did in service of the greater good of DU. You can't accuse her of being anything besides misguided.

[closeupready]

220. K&R for someone I've always considered to be an outstanding friend to have

when you need one.