Who Are You? Do You Know?

[McCamy Taylor]

Since there is zero transparency on the Internet, no one knows for sure who writes what. However, in my experience:

1. If the nickname has "liberal", "blue" or "dem" in it, watch out. Real liberal, blue Dems do not feel compelled to establish their identity by their name. They do it by their words. I see more questionable content in things posted by "LibBluDem4EverAndEver" (made this up, my apologies if this is anyone's DU name) than by any other types of posters.

2. If someone who professes to be an "ordinary housewife" shows up every time a certain sector of the economy---say Monsanto--is the topic of discussion and if said "ordinary housewife" has a scientific fund of knowledge about said sector of the economy---say Monsanto--that would make Einstein green with envy, the "ordinary housewife" works for Monsanto. If you are not 100% sure that someone works for Monsanto, post a thread critical of Monsanto and see if they show up.

3. On a related note, airplane hijackers are criminals. Thread hijackers are a different type of criminal. If they seem determined to get a thread locked down by starting a nuclear war of words or simply try to get everyone off on a tangent, there is something about the OP they do not like. Test the theory. Repeat the OP in numerous threads. See if the hijacker keeps showing up.

4. Anyone who is attempting to "divide and conquer" is not a friend. "Divide and conquer" is the GOP's biggest political weapon. For instance, any post that seeks to pit Blacks against Gays is by definition, Divide and Conquer. Or Latinos against Unions. Unions love Latinos. That makes the GOP very uncomfortable (as it should). The proper response is "This is a divide and conquer post." You will be amazed at how quickly the attempt to divide and conquer stops once you make this clear. I think DU needs to get a "Divide and Conquer" smiley.

[Agschmid]

1. #3

IMO, only the OP can get a thread locked. If you post meta or something outside the SOP & someone alerts. The actual responses to the OP should not matter. Also that last step where someone alerts is incredibly important, if no one alerts the hosts aren't going to lock it.

Again all my opinion.

And I'll recuse myself if this thread happens to pop up in hosts which it likely will.

[McCamy Taylor]

3. Really? I've seen threads get locked after wars of words have been started that are tangential to

the thread. But I have been here a long time. Maybe that doesn't happen any more.

[Agschmid]

5. I *hope* it doesn't, but nobody is perfect nor should they pretend to be.

I think since the changes in the host group it's run quite a bit more smoothly. Also people seem to leave their on board disagreements aside which is good.

Call out on Rhett... Sorry.

Rhett and I don't always see eye to eye out here on the boards and we make that clear however I have respect for this member and we work perfectly fine together as hosts. That's an important skill and I'm glad that the changes made that possible.

Again all this is IMO only.

[hootinholler]

23. Back when there were moderators

Threads would be locked for becoming flame fests.

The new model actually controls that fairly well. Once in a great while an admin will lock or pull a thread. Once a thread does get too hot, hosts may look for locking justification in the OP, but the direction is to only consider the OP when locking.

[sendero]

2. There is zero question...

.. in my mind that there are paid PR folks posting here. The number one thing that gives them away is that of all of the subjects discussed here they only post about one.

Pretty obvious.

[McCamy Taylor]

4. Then you are missing the corporate paid posters. There are a bunch of them

and being paid professionals, they do a pretty good job of blending in---until their corporation is under attack. If you think someone is a paid corporate poster, respond to one of their posts with something really devastating about their company. They will suddenly disappear because they do not want to draw attention to your OP anymore by kicking it up.

[Buzz Clik]

15. And you know this with certainty because....???

I find it difficult to believe that corporations paying someone to post at DU is at all commonplace.

[zeemike]

17. Yes they do, but not just at DU.

Think about it, you pay for 8 hours of work, you could not spend it all at DU. They go all over the net doing their work...no doubt with software for that purpose.

I read a while back about just such an operation as reported by one who worked one of those jobs...it was called something like Confessions of a Paid Troll...where he spent his working hours on posting single issue propaganda.
Big business has lots of money to spend and lots of hungry people who need a job.

Took the time to look it up...here.
http://wakeup-world.com/2012/10/03/pay-for-comments-confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-internet-shill/

[BeanMusical]

25. Hum, sounds familiar:

They pose as readers and first-time commenters, but post essay length commentary quoting “expert” government research on a range of topics, question those who dare question the government line, and urge us to believe in the path chosen for us by our ‘trusted’ leaders.

[Inkfreak]

53. I think I finally realize what all those flyers mean.

The "Work From Home" ones I see on bus stops. I knew I shoulda called!

[Buzz Clik]

54. You're unemployed? That's a shame.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

6. I gotta say, I do tend to give more weight to the words of folks

who are willing to post under their own real names. Sure, it was fun to make up 'handles' when I was younger, or for things like MMOs, but I'm happy enough to be me these days, and I tend to think that other people who post under their own names are likewise more comfortable in their own skin as it were, and less likely to be trying to play head games, and more likely to simply be saying what they think.

[Codeine]

8. If we all had names as cool as yours

nobody would ever use a handle.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. Laugh.

Well, you can always change it and give your kids a more 'cool' name to carry on.

I thought if I had kids I'd let them choose their own names, let them know that whatever they got from me was a 'temp', and that they'd get to choose their own identity going forward. (Well, after I'd gotten it out of my system that I'd want 2 kids and name the first 'Bjorn' and the second 'Bjorn Again'.) Really, there are a lot of folks saddled with old family names that give them nothing but grief through their lives.

[fasttense]

26. I use to post under my real name

But then I got laid off and was looking for another job. I goggled myself and found a lot of crap (some of it by another person with my same name) about my name sake. So, I stopped using my real name. In the end it didn't really matter because I never did get another job. I work for myself now thanks to the Great RepubliCON Recession and Obama's refusal to start another civilian corp.

By the way, someone once approached me about writing pro-corporate posts for pay. They were looking for someone with a good amount of farming experience. But when I was so quick to turn them down, they made out like it was a joke. I'm not so sure it was. They asked some strange questions about where I posted and how much time I spent online.

Sometimes, near the end of the month, I can understand how someone could be a traitor and post pro-corporate crap.

[Sancho]

55. I don't post under my name because I don't want to "represent" my employer.

We're warned frequently that we are in big trouble if we appear to be speaking for an organization.

The easiest way to deal with that is to use a handle.

Some of my colleagues recently spoke out on an issue here (guns on college campuses in Florida) at a public meeting. The NRA filed a ethics complain against them saying they were representing their employer, not their own personal views. Even though they will likely win, the cost and time to defend themselves is a huge problem.

OTOH, I've spotted people who appear to be paid operatives to me for exactly the reasons mentioned in this OP.

[cali]

7. I honestly think it's a waste of time to fret about this stuff

It's not like it can be established.

[marble falls]

10. Navel gazing on DU? I agree. The fret over "paid" posters makes me smile. Why would corporations....

pay to sway the opinion of a couple of thousand DUers who for the most part aren't sitting on the fence over any issues at all?

[notadmblnd]

28. a couple of thousand?

There are over 100,000 DU'ers. I know DU doesn't post the number of members any longer, but I remember when I signed up they did. I was number 29,000 and something. Many have come and many have gone, but there's way more than a couple of thousand.

[marble falls]

56. Active members? Can't be more than a couple of thousand actively contributing.

[notadmblnd]

59. I think it's 10k or more active members on any given day.

With 10s of thousands who lurk daily. Maybe the admins have the metrics, I don't know- I suppose we could ask them?

[marble falls]

61. There certainly aren't 10k posts a day.

[notadmblnd]

62. as I said ask the admins because there are certainly more than a couple of thousand

I'm not going to argue with you. But if you are implying that DU is inconsequential as a website, you are mistaken.

[zeemike]

19. And I agree with that.

It is a waste of time to fret about it...there is nothing to be done about it.

Even if I am sure I am talking with a troll or a shill I treat them the same and rely on arguments to establish what is true...or just ignore them. They don't convince as many as they think they do.

[daleanime]

32. +1

[Ghost in the Machine]

11. Yes, I know exactly who I am...

I met myself a long, long time ago

This is not intended to be a "call out", but I had taken some time off from DU, and everything else computer related, for a while due to some health problems. When I finally came back online, DU was the first place I came to. I noticed that someone was posting under the name "ghostsinthemachine" and it struck me as a little odd at first... mainly hoping that people weren't thinking that it was me, and hoping that the Admins didn't think I had made a sock puppet. I've been here around 9 - 10 years, and lurked for a couple of years before I signed up. People who have been here as long as I have probably know my posting style and this other poster was nothing near my style so I just thought to myself "Meh, no harm no foul."

As for your post, I have seen everything you've mentioned and agree whole-heartedly! I gave it a REC...

Happy Memorial Day

Peace,

Ghost

[Exilednight]

12. I rarely post to threads where I agree with everything being said. I don't see the point of living

In an echo chamber; that's what the right does.

I know who I am, and I know what I stand for and support.

[NRaleighLiberal]

13. Yes, watch out for me. Some of us are actually honest - so my user name reflect what I am.

It's just the internet. Best to go out and be among people - eye contact, true relationships, are far better!



aka NRaleighConservativeDumbass, I guess!

[AwakeAtLast]

35. Got my eyes on you

Don't make me page Skittles......

[madokie]

43. I know you,

you're the tomato man
And a damn fine person at that

[NRaleighLiberal]

47. right back 'atcha, pal!

[sufrommich]

14. Threads like these are barely concealed invitations to

accuse.

Here's the thing,like all internet forums some people are sincere and some are shit stirring (like this OP),common sense should guide you in determining who is who.

Putting "dem" or "liberal" or "blue" in your name on Democratic Underground isn't reason to cast suspicion on any DUer.

Real live people will sometimes disagree with you without getting paid to do so...I know it's hard to believe,but it's true.

[Buzz Clik]

16. This is my favorite from the OP:

2. If someone who professes to be an "ordinary housewife" shows up every time a certain sector of the economy---say Monsanto--is the topic of discussion and if said "ordinary housewife" has a scientific fund of knowledge about said sector of the economy---say Monsanto--that would make Einstein green with envy, the "ordinary housewife" works for Monsanto. If you are not 100% sure that someone works for Monsanto, post a thread critical of Monsanto and see if they show up.

Let's check out the other side of the coin: If someone demonstrates expertise in, say, environmentally-related sciences and embraces an opinion that is contrary to current DU dogma, that person will instantly and loudly be accused of being a shill for Monsanto.

[Major Nikon]

22. Just because you are no longer paranoid, doesn't mean they're not still out to get you

One must always assume bad faith unless it's proven they can toe one person's idea of what the party line looks like, and since everyone is anonymous that will conveniently never be proven. That way you can just write off anyone who doesn't agree with you as some sort of paid shill or other assorted agitator and if it were not for them, we could all just sit in a circle holding hands and singing Kumbayah.

[Buzz Clik]

37. Oh, my.

I do declare, you have a way with words.

[Major Nikon]

40. Reader's Digest version of the OP

[PosterChild]

36. its the idea that an "ordinary houswife" couldn't possibly . ...

... have any specialized or technical information or hold and express a sophisticated, well informed, considered opinion that irks me.

[Buzz Clik]

38. The tales we could tell of successful women who abandoned their careers for domestic pursuits.

[PosterChild]

39. Let's see... "Buzz" and "Click"...

...something suspicious about that screen name... I know! It must have been genetically modified ! !! Alert! Alert! Intruder! Intruder!

[demmiblue]

58. Good point. n/t

[McCamy Taylor]

46. I wrote "ordinary housewife" because the first one to catch my eye using this ploy

went by the name of "California Housewife" back at Salon a gazillion years ago. She/he had a few posts here and there about books, movies. Nothing too spectacular. But anytime the subject was Managed Care, he/she would pull up tons of statistics, financial facts about the industry etc.---all while pretending to be a stay at home mom with no particular financial interest in the managed care industry. It was a hoot.

I do not mind if someone comes out and says "I work in the ____ industry and this is my opinion." That is an expert opinion. I do mind when they make a point of saying "I'm just an ordinary person with no financial interest in this subject at all..." and then show an insiders knowledge of the topic. That is called Astroturfing----attempting to make others believe that grassroots people share industry's biases.

[frazzled]

18. In other words ...

Anyone who does not agree with you on a subject or who makes a comment that doesn't hew to what you perceive to be the sole topic of the thread is suspect: a paid troll, a disruptor ... criminal!

That's kind of messed up.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. In other words, some people are sincere when they express an opinion here (whether you or I agree or not), some people's nicknames are just that and nothing more.

Have another beer and chill. It's just an Internet board anyway, not a reflection of the real world.

[LiberalElite]

21. DU is especially

not a reflection of the real world. Except for all the nuts.

[LiberalElite]

20. Really?

I think you need a break from DU.

[Major Nikon]

24. Sounds more like this is being hijacked

[HassleCat]

27. Money Involved?

I believe there are people paid to troll the internet and flood sites with rebuttals, disinformation, flaming, provocations, etc. On one site, any mention of climate change brings an immediate response from the same person, who posts pages and pages of canned talking points and "scientific" boilerplate. I see the same tactics when the subject is vaccination or GMOs. I suspect these people are paid to do this, and supplied with software that alerts them to various topics on various boards.

[brooklynite]

29. If you think there's an organized effort to mislead people in DU threads...

...I think you massively overestimate the importance of DU in the outside world.

[mopinko]

30. alert, alert, alert.

threads are rarely locked these days when they devolve. only if the op is alerted on and judged a violation.
subthreads snipped, either.

remember that if a post is hidden that person is locked out of the thread. that stops a lot of nonsense. just remember to pick the post carefully. jury members can but are not required to look at other posts in a thread.

and jurors- please do not cite free speech as a reason to leave trash laying around. this is not the public square. you signed an agreement when you signed up. perhaps you should reread it if you think that way.

[3catwoman3]

31. I'm busted. I am not who my screen name suggests I am.

I have 5 cats, not just 3.

[Major Nikon]

33. Fraud!

[sufrommich]

34. ......

[awoke_in_2003]

41. Damn....

I was hoping you were the Catwoman (Eartha Kit version).

[Number23]

42. !!!

[hfojvt]

45. here I was hoping you were

Eccentrica Gallumbits

but that would be useless without pictures anyway.

[hfojvt]

44. can I still go sleep at home tonight

if I can get up and walk away?

[Art_from_Ark]

48. Please tell me who I am

[LostOne4Ever]

50. You forgot one!

5. Those who try to cast spurious suspicion on others in an effort to divert attention from themselves.

[LostOne4Ever]

51. Who am I?

[center][/center]

[Skittles]

52. according to one DUer, the "Far Left" HATES SUCCESS!!!

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

[demmiblue]

57. And look out for those whose names sound like the love child of McDonald's and the Toyota Camry.

Clearly corporate spies and FUDders!

[Blue_Tires]

60. ttt

[kentauros]

63. Thanks for #4.

I'll have to use it the next time some yahoo actively supports the secession of any state in the Union.

#3 reminds me of a type I've started calling SILs, or "Single Issue Liberal." That is, their one issue in life is The Most Important Issue Ever For All Liberals, and they will find whatever minuscule link in any topic to their single issue. It's akin to thread-jacking, though I often see folks ignoring them more than engaging, especially if the link is ever so tenuous.

[sufrommich]

64. Dear Hosts: This is what a Meta thread looks like. nt

[aikoaiko]

65. Did you send an SOP alert to the hosts?