Best case for a subject line edit in DU history, imho
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5913516I have not alerted, hoping he/she will edit.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Disgusting!
He will not say boo about it other than that.
About the ads, I don't even see them anymore - my mind's eye blocks them. Cept this one, I thought was funny:
There are some words that should NOT be spelled out on DU in subject titles, and that's one of them. If we allow EVERY word in subject titles, this place will become Stormfront Lite. Bank on it. Yea, funny ad. 
A certain crew has been burning a hundred calories per day pretending that DU is where all of the smarter than thou, leftier than thous hang out and that its membership and reach were stronger than ever. This same crew has been dismayed at the multiple threads about how DUs viewership and numbers have absolutely PLUMMETED in the last few months. They've been going down consistently for the last few years but are dropping startlingly fast now.
And I'm sure it's just a coincidence that most in this crew also run, not walk, RUN to downplay racism/sexism every chance that they get. Yeah, a coincidence. 
Apparently they are as correct about DUs influence as they are about everything else.
Thank you for seeing things as they are. 
And I've been trying to out my name in jury alerts too. if it was a requirement we would probably have a lot less nonsense. 
And welcome to the AA Group!
to you
I may misunderstand the purpose of this site, but she was making a point about what cops are really saying. You can dismiss me, not my problem, and I am not offended by the truth of people using that word as an example of the hate out there for AA's. I'm not saying as an AA, that word is not filled with hate. If the post in question is a troll trying to cause problems then I have everything backwards. I don't think I do but I hope some I deal with daily here would tell me if they think I'm wrong. Sorry if I offended you with my words.
I am learning how to do the DU thing better. Best wishes.
Not that much older - but old enough to remember Jim Crow. And to have experienced its sting first hand.
And that word quite a bit. 
I see his point here. YOU get things that a lot of folks here don't. As does heaven.
And that thread - showed us a lot. I think some of my discomfort with it is that it can lead to . . .
Oh - you have to SAY that word to be a bigot.
We all three know that is not the truth.
Now who at DU will say - "but I've never said that word so I can't be a racist."? Someone will point that out eventually - that thread/content as a source and it's going to create one hell of a brouhaha because we KNOW a dog whistler from a blatant - even though they are one and the same.
Someone smack my head! It's coming!
First, when it comes to this group, I don't feel like I have the right to say much (yeah, I say much but you have no idea how much I can talk ) That's because as a white woman, I can't possibly know exactly how an AA person feels or experiences.
I agree with Heaven. I almost always do. In fact, I don't think I can remember a time I haven't.
However, I do believe that the poster, after the obvious hurt and offense was shown, should have somehow changed the post. Minimally, softened the headline. Maybe used the quote in full in the body of the post.
The word is horrid. The best I can relate is the number of times I have been called something disgusting regarding my sexuality. It was even made a meme on Facebook, using my picture with Obama, and spread around in groups with hundreds of members. Still not the same but since it was so personal, I believe I can relate.
But I also think that softening it detracts from the outrageous texts between the cops. Something that shouldn't be detracted from.
However, as big as DU is, there's really only a few constant members posting and replying. So it then becomes personal and when that many are that offended, you deal with it. You don't explain it's a quote, as if that isn't understood.
My two cents
critical thinking abilities are always appreciated by me, no matter the group. That being said, I do agree that the 'offense' taken by many has to be addressed by poster whether the poster doubles down, which I would not object to or softens the the offense taken by many with an explanation of why she felt the need to post that way, "quote" or not. Which the poster tried to do, I think, before the thread was locked down by one of the 'offended'. I think a lot of the offense taken was overblown because of 'that word' yet the real intent of post, which was admirable to me, was disregarded in the 'explosion' of outrage. I will say this though, the explosion was understood by me as a response that the offended were entitled to and could be expected, now that I have had time to think of the whole brouhaha. I do salute the poster for trying to bring a little reality to our world.
here. Thank you for your apology that is magnanimously stated and kindly received by me.
