Ok. Is it just me or does any one else see
The irony of aikoaiko locking that thread in GD? Of all the hosts serving they let one that has posted in the thread be the one to lock it. Really?
= new reply since forum marked as read
The poster questioned sea about posting jury results...
https://www.google.com/search?q=aikoaiko+%2B+and+the+jury+results+are+in&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com#q=aikoaiko+%2B+and+the+jury+results+are+in+site:democraticunderground.com&start=0
How Meta!
Hypocrites are so often inclined to seize the moral high ground both in life and on DU. 
I guess what I need to know is which days will those be, so that I can adjust my schedule accordingly.
Otherwise, I am in full agreement with what you are saying. I do not engage either, as I have found it to be nonproductive and a waste of my valuable, precious time.
I read, for content, if there is any and, quickly realize that it is not about principles but, personalities with a certain group.
Skinner says to educate and, I know that sea thinks there is a larger audience being reached and so, she continues forging on.
For the bigger Cause.
It grows tiresome watching a small group manipulate the system to get their sadistic little jollies.
I believe seabeyond thinks differently and so engages and attempts to edify for those lurking. 
Maybe we should all together, in a big group, stop responding to them. In any way, shape or form. It might be hard though, arguing is fun 
Hosts who abuse their power like this should not still be hosts. And the witch hunt against Sea in particular and HoF in general needs to stop.
keep the benefits it allows.
No Ads.
Posting Polls.
Search Function.
Jury Blacklist Enlarged (although I don't use that one, I mention it for those that do).
Increases the odds of being called to Jury Duty.
I wanted to chime in about seabeyond's locked OP (I'm a GD host).
When the SoP alert on that OP was posted in the Hosts' group, I gave my opinion that the post was "discussing the discussion" rather than whining about DU. A handful of other hosts felt that if the OP had not included the jury results, the post would have been fine.
On my own, I sent sea a DUMail and asked her if she would consider editing out the jury result, so that the OP would be less likely to be locked (I even pointed out that she could post the jury result in a reply to her edited OP). She considered it, but opted not to.
Meanwhile, the hosts' discussion continued, and subsequent arguments made a convincing case that the OP was, in effect, complaining about the jury decision (even though the main point of the OP was sea's issue with people diminishing the treatment of women by saying women are treated even worse elsewhere, the inclusion of the jury result - which did not go in her favor - tipped the post into "whining" territory). To be honest, I think the inclusion of the jury results actually distracted people from the main point of the OP, which could have been an interesting discussion.
On a side note, once seabeyond was sent on her forced time-out, it didn't seem fair to me that she was unable to respond in her own thread. While that doesn't have anything to do with a host's responsibility, it probably helped nudge my opinion on the locking vote.
As for the host who locked it, he was the host who started the host thread, and typically that person is the one who locks the thread, if that's what is decided. I thought his locking message was a fair assessment of the hosts' discussion. I know he has some issues with feminists, but I didn't see anything unreasonable in his dealing with seabeyond's OP (except maybe his alert and request to lock it quickly, which didn't happen).
I'm sorry if locking the post upset anybody, and I think the hosts, as a whole, acted in good faith.
(Sorry this reply got so long!) 
but, first let me say thank you for, at least, trying to explain what took place.
I just think, that on the whole, the one doing the complaining should be the Last One to Lock a Thread.
as Obviously (to me) they would be the least objective.
To my way of thinking the Jury Results gave an example of the point sea was trying to make.
as for aikoaiko, I think, his actions (both now and in the past) pretty much speak for their self.
On the whole, I have to give Hosts (and MIRt) credit for doing something that I will never again volunteer to do.
on edit: I also need to address this comment about the locking statement =
This is the locking statement =
You do understand that given aikoaiko's posting pattern how blatantly disingenuous that looks. The appearance of the way this was all handled is just curious. Also, the irony of a man locking a woman's thread about women's issues, at this juncture of DU3's history, is just adding fuel to the fire.
Things are not always as they appear but, from the look of the way this was handled to those of us who do not have access to private group discussions seems highly suspect.
I'm not familiar with aikoaiko's posting pattern. Does he routinely include jury results, or something? I have to admit, I don't really read his posts, except for those in the Hosts group.
Anyway, it's probably all my fault, because I changed my vote from "leave" to "lock" after the case was made about the jury results. 
good grief! 
Post an OP without jury results, and then post the jury results in a reply.
coming to that conclusion.
Sorry.
but probably not prominently enough. Sorry!
...and my original argument was that the OP was "talking about DU" - and the hosts who replied agreed, except that jury result appeared to be a complaint about the outcome. I think everyone who weighed in on the alert felt that way. The post was fine, except for the jury result.
I don't have a problem with hosts alerting and even bringing the alert to the Hosts group - it's just an obvious "lock" vote from that host. Typically, though, I abstain from voting to lock threads in which I've participated (many hosts do). I probably shouldn't have changed my vote, but the jury result really did appear to be a complaint about the outcome of the alert.
seen your posts in the hosts forum and you take great pains to be fair. 
After the big hoo-haw last week about hosts gossiping about Will Pitt in the host forum, here comes this travesty. A known feminist-baiter, with a known history of posting jury results, who alerted on sea's thread and then locked it when he didn't get his way - tell me again how this is okay.
And speaking of seabeyond, it's been 90 days since her two oldest hidden threads. Why isn't she out of time out yet?
Much to the chagrin of some DUers. 
and then Pushes for consensus in the Host's Forum and uses the argument of Jury Results in OP while flagrantly posting ALL juries he is on ...
Baines, I can excuse one of these actions and give benefit of doubt on a second action but, when one adds it all up ... it gives the appearance of collusion 
and foul play to those of us without access to the Host's Group. 
Perhaps, it is time for some clear cut definition of CONSENSUS and some protocol should be established for how Hosts proceed within well defined parameters and policies. 
Also, I have thought for a while now that TWENTY (always thought it should be an odd number so as to avoid a tie) is too large a number for Hosts and thusly contributes to the problem of quickly and fairly forming a consensus. I understand that might be a minority opinion around here but, it is a valid argument, I think.
to see that this does not happen again in the future.
I am trying to decide just how much of my time should be devoted to posting/contributing to this site going forward.
Thanks, mercuryblues. I understand your frustration with this predicament. 
and it helps rearrange your perspective.
Last edited Fri Mar 28, 2014, 04:22 PM - Edit history (1)
I started with trash thread, and I only have 4 people on ignore--ones I consider trouble makers or trolls. I hate using ignore, but it did make a difference, when dealing with constant negative prolific posters or just nasty ones I just don't want to see-- ever.
Edit 5 now
call out.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4745941
The same host who locked Seabeyonds OP for being Meta and a call out thinks this one should stay. Gee, I wonder why. 
Nothing to see here folks,move along. 
Would love to make it happen