I'm getting more and more calls to jury duty from GD-P these days.

[KamaAina]

Could we please not let GD-P morph into the Gungeon? Please?

[UglyGreed]

1. had seven calls of mine own

in two days. God only knows how many juries have been about my posts these days.

[Skinner]

2. You can't be called for DU jury service seven times in two days.

[Teagan]

3. How does it work?

[UglyGreed]

4. I've had quite a few

I could be wrong I just guessed at the number. Perhaps four or five since I started posting once again so check the time line of my posts.

[NCTraveler]

19. They are in your inbox.

Why not post the results since you are called so often? It isn't against the rules and would really show if what you are being called on are frivolous or if they are all after one group. You have seven of them from very recently. That should give us a little insight as to the direction of alerts.

[BooScout]

7. I get called about once a day....

And I'm on here a lot since I retired....so 7 times in two days seems rather outside the normal parameters. Maybe a lot of people have me on their jury blacklist.

[boston bean]

8. Thanks for the reality check!

PS I was getting concerned....

[Logical]

13. So have alerts increased in the last couple of months? nt

[artislife]

14. Why don't you limit the number of times people can alert?

I don't alert, I just trash threads or put posters on ignore...but it seems like there are people who are alert happy. Why not give posters a certain number of alerts for a certain period and if they use them up, they have to wait until the deadline passes. This will make people think if they really want to waste one of their alerts on a post that is usually just annoying but not really alert worthy.

[TheKentuckian]

15. I knew when certain folks started whining recently it was projection when they

continued to oppose limits on alerts.

I think really if need more than 12 a year it is somewhat of a problem but if you need more than 6 a month then you need a new hobby.

There is nothing good for discussion that anyone needs unlimited alerts but they hold on them for dear life probably because they are machine gunning that shit at any provocation or on a grudge mission.

[artislife]

16. I would love to see names.

That would be crazy fun!

There are people who are way too serious about this and need to take up knitting or something.

[Zorra]

24. 6 alerts per member per year would go far in eliminating frivolous

and/or serial alerting.

[Skinner]

17. Here's why:

1) People don't actually alert very much.

2) We already have a system to deal with alerts (both legitimate and illegitimate) -- it's called juries and they work pretty well.

3) If someone tries to send an alert without merit, they get a 0-7 and have their alerting automatically limited.

4) If any juror does not like occasionally serving on juries for alerts they consider frivolous, they can easily opt out of jury service.

And

5) Alerts are GOOD. They are what keeps this website relatively civil.

[artislife]

20. Thank you for answering

Not completely agreeing, but I can respect it.

[Logical]

11. Really? nt

[UglyGreed]

18. I was just being sarcastic

But like I replied to Skinner, ever since I began posting again I have been called for jury duty at least five or six times. I know for a fact it was twice yesterday. I guess Skinner found the need to call me out because I've been riding Hillary pretty hard these days Well at least I finally got a reply from the head honcho

[cwydro]

25. No, I think he called you out (as you term it) because what you said was a complete falsehood.

People make up so much nonsense about the jury system.

According to your profile, you have only a 60% chance of being called for jury duty, and you claim 7 calls in two days?

I have a 100% chance of jury duty, and at most get one call every other day.

[UglyGreed]

29. Well I had two yesterday

by that math I was off by a day and a half so there SMH

[cwydro]

30. As others have pointed out, you can always decline.

I rarely decline. I think I did once because I saw that the alerted post was by one of the few posters I have zero respect for, and I ws afraid I wouldn't be fair.

I really do my best to be fair. I only vote to hide in clear personal attacks.

I agree with you that many alerts seem frivolous, however I still think the jury system works.

[UglyGreed]

35. I don't mind serving

but in some cases TOS IMO should be enforced outside of the Jury system. Thanks for the reply.

[UglyGreed]

31. Oh by way the

only problem I have with the jury system that it is a popularity contest. If you don't like the poster or what that person wrote personal attacks are allowed to remain. Then that empowers others to attack the poster personally. Personal attacks are against TOS and should be dealt with as such. I've seen explanations like, that poster deserves to be called names so many times, more than seven

[Laffy Kat]

5. Just refuse. I only do it when I have the time and motivation.

Although that's probably not your point. I get it. Never mind.

[restorefreedom]

6. i have noticed that too. nt

[Recursion]

9. There are threads I have commented on simply to avoid jury duty on them (nt)

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 11:11 PM - Edit history (1)

[KamaAina]

10. Oh, is that how it works?

That's news I can use!

[Logical]

12. Why not just refuse jury service??? nt

[MoonRiver]

21. Same here.

I have to say that most of the alerts are really, really lame.

[JRLeft]

23. Alerts are a form of censorship.

I never alert anyone.

[demwing]

34. That's just silly

First, I think you mean Jury Hides are a form of censorship.

Second, your post implies that all censorship is bad. Some things need to be hidden, such as hate speech or personal attacks. These types of comments are not conducive to the operation of an online community. Sure, they could be left to stand, but DU would quickly become an ugly, unhappy place to hand out, and fewer and fewer people would ever post.

Even in the physical world, freedom of speech is not absolute. You cannot incite violence, for example. Prudent, limited censorship provides a measure of real world security. Why should our online world be any less secured?

[Capt. Obvious]

22. I seem to be getting one a day at least

[atreides1]

26. I decided to opt out

With an 80% chance of being selected and with most of what I saw as nothing more then a bunch of hurt feelings and attempts at censorship on the part of the alerter, I decided I just didn't want to do it anymore!

I've always believed that the accused should have the right to face their accuser, but with the kangaroo court style of this jury system...it doesn't happen, so much for transparency!!!

[KamaAina]

28. I enjoy calling the bogus alerters out too much to do that.

[sharp_stick]

27. It's worse than the gungeon

GD-P is rapidly gaining on meta as the armpit of DU.

[cwydro]

32. You just can't take it seriously/personally.

I used never to come to GD-P, but now I find it kind of amusing.

It's always the same posters on both sides trying to outdo each other in mean-spiritedness. But if you pay attention, you can see the rational, reasonable DUers hanging in there.

The mean-spirited ones never will change a single mind on either side, so basically they're just blowing hot air up their own arses.

[TSIAS]

33. I don't find it onerous

I get a message perhaps twice a week, and even the most difficult assignment maybe takes five minutes to adjudicate.

I can also count on one hand the number of alerts I have sent. From past experience with the moderating process, I think the jury system is more fair than leaving it to the moderators.