Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 12:47 AM Mar 30

Is DU gonna have members sign a TOS to support our presidential candidate?

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Omaha Steve (a host of the DU Community Help forum).

There is too much anti-Biden stuff in discussion threads.

31 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Is DU gonna have members sign a TOS to support our presidential candidate? (Original Post) LeftInTX Mar 30 OP
Perhaps we should take a pledge too AkFemDem Mar 30 #1
They sent it in DU mail. You agreed to it. If you didn't your posting privileges were revoked. LeftInTX Mar 30 #2
Stop with this nonsense AkFemDem Mar 30 #8
We had it 2016. Why is it nonsense if we had it then? LeftInTX Mar 30 #9
I was here in 2016 and I can assure you AkFemDem Mar 30 #10
Yes, we certainly did!!! Ask the mods. LeftInTX Mar 30 #11
No 🙄 AkFemDem Mar 30 #12
Yes... Why are you harassing me about this?? We had to do it in 2016. That's why I'm asking. LeftInTX Mar 30 #13
I have been here from the first in 2001. When you register you agree to TOS, but no you are wrong hlthe2b Mar 30 #17
No they didn't Tree-Hugger Mar 30 #21
what else would you like to ban? nt msongs Mar 30 #3
We had a TOS survey in 2016 due to all the infighting. LeftInTX Mar 30 #5
havent seen any posters saying they will not support the democratic nominee nt msongs Mar 30 #6
I'm reading stuff..They didn't say it in 2016 until the survey either. LeftInTX Mar 30 #7
They will out themselves through alerts, and if it is blatant then JohnSJ Mar 30 #4
Where is it? In Gaza discussions? usonian Mar 30 #14
we have a number of relevant forum rules, juries and moderation stopdiggin Mar 30 #15
I know. I just like to feel that people on our forums are supporting Biden and they aren't here to disrupt. LeftInTX Mar 30 #16
I think you might be mis-representing... Think. Again. Mar 30 #19
It wasn't you. I know the conversation was sorta back and forth..LOL LeftInTX Mar 30 #23
You are calling out my posts. Big Blue Marble Mar 30 #25
Earl explained it here. LeftInTX Mar 30 #29
I am confident that there are enough safeguards to protect DU from Big Blue Marble Mar 30 #30
I take my removed posts as a verdict of opinion LakeArenal Mar 30 #26
Actually, I think asking members... Think. Again. Mar 30 #18
I think everyone is partially misremembering what happened in 2016 EarlG Mar 30 #20
Thank you! LeftInTX Mar 30 #22
I take it you do not recall loyalty oaths.... mike_c Mar 30 #24
"16. I know. I just like to feel that people on our forums are supporting Biden and they aren't here to disrupt." LakeArenal Mar 30 #27
or read the eula. AllaN01Bear Mar 30 #28
By request from LeftInTX LOCKING Omaha Steve Mar 30 #31

AkFemDem

(1,832 posts)
1. Perhaps we should take a pledge too
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:03 AM
Mar 30

And repeat an oath or something…

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
2. They sent it in DU mail. You agreed to it. If you didn't your posting privileges were revoked.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:06 AM
Mar 30

A bunch of /Green Party/Putin supporters left and started another forum.

AkFemDem

(1,832 posts)
8. Stop with this nonsense
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:16 AM
Mar 30

No real democrat is going to support this kind of autocratic suggestion. Just hush. No one here is supporting anyone but Biden anyway, but even if they were you can’t control them this way. This is just drama drama drama.

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
9. We had it 2016. Why is it nonsense if we had it then?
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:18 AM
Mar 30

AkFemDem

(1,832 posts)
10. I was here in 2016 and I can assure you
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:20 AM
Mar 30

I never had to pledge to jack shit. Are you TRYING to make the admin here look as if they force votes a certain way? Seriously- is the an attempt at sowing seeds of mistrust?

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
11. Yes, we certainly did!!! Ask the mods.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:22 AM
Mar 30

AkFemDem

(1,832 posts)
12. No 🙄
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:22 AM
Mar 30

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
13. Yes... Why are you harassing me about this?? We had to do it in 2016. That's why I'm asking.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:24 AM
Mar 30

I'm not asking you!!! I'm asking the mods.

hlthe2b

(102,324 posts)
17. I have been here from the first in 2001. When you register you agree to TOS, but no you are wrong
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 05:57 AM
Mar 30

that a TOS agreement was sent via DUmail to all DUers in 2016 or any other time. When you register, you agree to a linked TOS. If some received a DU mail copy of the TOS in 2016 it is possible they were among those the admins purposely sought to remind during the overheated primaries-- the latter which did lead to a lot of posters being "PPRd" and/or leaving to Jackpine Radicals, I agree. But that was not the case for the entire membership.

There are no loyalty pledges just an agreement to post in a manner consistent with the site policies as laid out in the TOS that includes supporting Democrats. It doesn't say there can be no discussion of disagreements.

Oh, and there have not been "moderators" since the DU2 version of the website. (We currently are DU4). We have two administrators, including the owner and the lead programmer and we have the jury system. If you post something that does not fit with the published linked purpose of a given forum, your post could be locked by the major forum hosts (and by those of the smaller subscriber forums). Such locked threads do not typically involve any penalties to the poster unless a jury alert occurred concurrently and determined otherwise.

Additionally, the Malicious Intruder Team (MIRT) does special scrutiny of new posters (less than 100 posts) that supplement the work of juries.

I suspect you are expressing concern over the Gaza-related criticism of Biden. I'd agree that some do not clearly express support for Biden trying to both protect Gazan civilians while supporting Israel's right to self-defense against Hamas. But, you can only engage them in discussion to try to clarify their views-- if they make a terse, yet unclear comment that leads you to believe otherwise.

Tree-Hugger

(3,370 posts)
21. No they didn't
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 10:47 AM
Mar 30

Maybe some of the JPR assholes got tos reminders when they were posting, but DU members as a whole did not receive any such thing in DU mail.

msongs

(67,430 posts)
3. what else would you like to ban? nt
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:07 AM
Mar 30

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
5. We had a TOS survey in 2016 due to all the infighting.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:09 AM
Mar 30

Those who did not agree to support the Democratic nominee had their Posting Privileges Revoked and they started that Jackpine Radicals

msongs

(67,430 posts)
6. havent seen any posters saying they will not support the democratic nominee nt
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:11 AM
Mar 30

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
7. I'm reading stuff..They didn't say it in 2016 until the survey either.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:15 AM
Mar 30

I don't know whether someone is a Democrat or not. Just because they're here, doesn't mean they're a Democrat.

JohnSJ

(92,304 posts)
4. They will out themselves through alerts, and if it is blatant then
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:09 AM
Mar 30

MIRT will accelerate the process

usonian

(9,842 posts)
14. Where is it? In Gaza discussions?
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 03:01 AM
Mar 30

I block them variously. And I see basically no Biden bashing.

Admins moved the discussion from a group to GD.
Statement of fact.

Forum
General Discussion: About this forum
Statement of Purpose

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. Posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports are restricted in this forum.

stopdiggin

(11,331 posts)
15. we have a number of relevant forum rules, juries and moderation
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 03:03 AM
Mar 30

feel free to use them if you feel it warranted. (or don't)
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
16. I know. I just like to feel that people on our forums are supporting Biden and they aren't here to disrupt.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 03:34 AM
Mar 30

When we had everyone sign the TOS in 2016, it just made feel better. Alot of people left and joined an anti-establishment site.
But I think it was the other admin's idea, but Skinner is gone.

I want to feel that they are here to support Democrats and that we have the goal of electing Democrats. I joined in October 2012 because I wanted Obama re-elected.

Biden has so many forces working against him. Besides Trump, there is the Green Party, RFK Jr, Cornel West, Party of Socialism and Liberation even those in his own party. We need all hands on deck. People were applauding protesters who crashed Biden, Obama's and Clinton's fundraiser in NYC. Even after I pointed out that the protesters were from a different political party, they still supported them. (They have their own presidential candidates, Claudia de la Cruz and the works...Party of Socialism and Liberation) I showed tweets from the Party of Socialism and Liberation, their presidential candidate and the videos of them crashing Biden's NYC fundraiser, they still supported them.

And it's hard to alert on a post and when all they say is "I support them", because that's all the post will say in the reply. A jury wouldn't do anything.

Think. Again.

(8,283 posts)
19. I think you might be mis-representing...
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 07:13 AM
Mar 30

...the discussion on that thread.

Is this the OP you are referring to?
(in case anyone is interested in reading it for themselves).

https://democraticunderground.com/100218819256

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
23. It wasn't you. I know the conversation was sorta back and forth..LOL
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:10 PM
Mar 30

I was accused of not supporting the first amendment after I pointed out that the protesters were from a different political party. And then a subsequent post said they supported Democrats because Democrats support the first amendment.

Democrats do not support protesters from other political parties at campaign events. I'm sure the event in NYC was huge and don't know what happened with the protesters.

Big Blue Marble

(5,104 posts)
25. You are calling out my posts.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:44 PM
Mar 30

Isn't that against DU rules? And for your information, I have been on DU since
2004 and have supported all Democratic Presidents with my dollars.. Since I originally agreed
to the TOS, I have never had to sign any loyalty oath. I do not know what
you are talking about. And really on a website, really, how meaningful would
that be.

I will alway support protests against the establishment whether it is union labor,
anti-racist, anti-war or anti-corporate. Their point is to be disruptive. It is one
of our most precious rights that have changed history over and over.


LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
29. Earl explained it here.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 02:05 PM
Mar 30
So when the big Jury overhaul happened following the primaries in 2016, everyone who signed in had to click a one-time button acknowledging that they had read and would abide by the new rules. We thought this was important not just because we wanted people to agree to the rules, but because the site hadn’t even *had* rules for five years, so we wanted everyone to read and understand the new ones before posting.

Since the new rules officially included our long-standing policy of support for the Democratic nominee after the primaries, along with new rules such as “Don’t keep fighting the last Democratic presidential primary,” quite a few die-hards refused to click the button and instead went elsewhere. Their choice.

So in that regard, you’re not wrong that people had to “sign something” — it was an agreement to the entire rules package which was a significant change to our Terms of Service. And that package included a rule which formalized our policy that people must support the Democratic nominee after the primaries.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1256&pid=25628


However, we aren't going to be signing anything this time because in 2016, the rules change was then and there has not been a rules change since 2016.

Big Blue Marble

(5,104 posts)
30. I am confident that there are enough safeguards to protect DU from
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 02:43 PM
Mar 30

disrupters as has happened in every other election cycle. Nothing more is needed.



I

LakeArenal

(28,831 posts)
26. I take my removed posts as a verdict of opinion
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:56 PM
Mar 30

Opinions I’m free to challenge or appeal as they say.

Finally ya win some and ya lose some.

Democratic.

PS. You aren’t going to find non Biden voters on DU. Supporting anyone means supporting them even when they say or do something that disappoints you personally.

Think. Again.

(8,283 posts)
18. Actually, I think asking members...
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 07:03 AM
Mar 30

....to review the TOS every now and then is a good idea.

EarlG

(21,958 posts)
20. I think everyone is partially misremembering what happened in 2016
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 08:59 AM
Mar 30

Last edited Sat Mar 30, 2024, 10:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Democratic Underground has ALWAYS had a policy that once the Democratic presidential primaries are over and we have a nominee, members must support that nominee.

When there are competitive primaries, it is not uncommon for people to get extremely attached to their choice, and sometimes people will go so far as to say things along the lines of, “If my candidate doesn’t become the nominee, I won’t vote.”

During the primaries, we would often let that slide. But if you’re still doing that AFTER the nominee has been decided, then you’re just trolling. This is spelled out in the “Support Democrats” rule.

Now for the part that people are probably misremembering. From 2001-2011, we had a rules-based system, where the rules were enforced by moderators. Those rules were not the same rules we have today. In 2011, we switched to the Jury system, and at the same time, we got rid of all the rules.

The Jury system from 2011-2016 was a much more radical version of the system. The only guidance we gave was to tell members to use their own best judgment when deciding whether a post was appropriate for DU or not.

This kinda-sorta worked for five years, but it was chaotic as hell. The fact that it lasted so long probably had something to do with the fact that there was no competitive primary in 2012, when Obama ran unopposed.

The flaws in the system were completely exposed, however, during the highly competitive Sanders vs. Clinton 2016. Those primaries, and the emergence of the “Bernie or bust” movement, saw a dramatic upswing in the number of people who claimed that they would refuse to vote for Hillary if she won, which got worse as it became obvious that she was going to win, but Bernie wasn’t dropping out.

We had observed that the free-for-all Jury system, which kinda-sorta worked in a chaotic way prior to the primaries, failed to work once members had drawn battle lines and divided themselves into two camps. Remember, at the time juries were not even anonymous! Everyone could see who was being alerted on, who was sending the alerts, and who was serving on the juries and how they voted. So it just became a partisan tool for members on both sides to smack each other.

We spent much of 2016 working on ways to reform the Jury system, and once the primaries were officially over we launched the new, reformed, rule-based system. The new system anonymized the process, and instead of asking members to simply decide whether a post was “appropriate or not” we asked them to decide whether a post violated one of the new rules. Those are the exact same rules we have today.

The rules-based system provided more guidance and incentive to good-faith actors and made it essentially impossible for disruptive people to wield the system as a weapon. However, since we were making a massive change to the Terms of Service, we needed to ask members to understand and accept that the rules had changed.

So when the big Jury overhaul happened following the primaries in 2016, everyone who signed in had to click a one-time button acknowledging that they had read and would abide by the new rules. We thought this was important not just because we wanted people to agree to the rules, but because the site hadn’t even *had* rules for five years, so we wanted everyone to read and understand the new ones before posting.

Since the new rules officially included our long-standing policy of support for the Democratic nominee after the primaries, along with new rules such as “Don’t keep fighting the last Democratic presidential primary,” quite a few die-hards refused to click the button and instead went elsewhere. Their choice.

So in that regard, you’re not wrong that people had to “sign something” — it was an agreement to the entire rules package which was a significant change to our Terms of Service. And that package included a rule which formalized our policy that people must support the Democratic nominee after the primaries.

But since 2016 the rules have remained the same, so there’s no need for us to make everyone sign some kind of pledge. We certainly didn’t do that in 2020, because nothing had changed — the “Support Democrats” rule had been in force since 2016, and remains in force to this day.

What we continue to do is allow additional leeway for members to more forcefully attack Democrats during “Primary Season” — which is normal and to be expected — provided that everyone reins it in and joins forces again during “General Election Season.” In fact I made an announcement on that very subject a few weeks ago:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/101314000

So I think there’s a fair bit of “half-remembering” exactly what happened in 2016 going on in this thread, but hopefully this additional context will settle the debate.

LeftInTX

(25,464 posts)
22. Thank you!
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 12:42 PM
Mar 30

mike_c

(36,281 posts)
24. I take it you do not recall loyalty oaths....
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:38 PM
Mar 30

They mean nothing in the seclusion of the voting booth.

LakeArenal

(28,831 posts)
27. "16. I know. I just like to feel that people on our forums are supporting Biden and they aren't here to disrupt."
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 01:59 PM
Mar 30

I find this whole thread to be disruptive.

AllaN01Bear

(18,318 posts)
28. or read the eula.
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 02:05 PM
Mar 30

Omaha Steve

(99,679 posts)
31. By request from LeftInTX LOCKING
Sat Mar 30, 2024, 06:09 PM
Mar 30
Latest Discussions»Help & Search»DU Community Help»Is DU gonna have members ...