For informational purposes only: Another interesting alert. Correct result, though, IMO.
But the thread got locked as OT anyway. Maybe the alerter alerted forum hosts and the jury at the same time? Not illegal, but an abuse of the jury alert system, IMO. Whoever started a jury process, thanks for wasting the time of seven DUers.
On Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:27 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
This is the link to the post on Wikileaks/Hillarys emails that was alerted on and hidden by Jury.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511550995
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Reposting hidden links.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:35 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: It was just hidden once. At best this is meta, at worst it's disruptive. Either way I vote to hide
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Right-wing conspiracy nonsense.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's an acceptable source and not a significant story. The constant harping on e-mails isn't helping Sanders at all, but on his supporters head be it.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: First, the poster posted a link to a hidden post, not to a hidden link. Second, what the poster did is done ALL the time all over the board, as I have a feeling you know. Stop alerting on everything you disagree with in hopes of getting a partisan jury.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
Juror 1 either does not know or pretends not to know that forum or group hosts decide on when to hide for disruptive meta, not jurors. Juror 3 pretends a link to a post linking to Hillary's actual emails is a right wing conspiracy.
smh
= new reply since forum marked as read
and then supposedly rig juries against Hillary's supporters alert stalked and rigged a jury for another Sanders supporter?
How very sloppy of them! With supporters like that, it's small wonder Sanders lost the 2016 Democratic primary in 2014!
On the other hand, who the eff do you think you are to think someone should get a hide for calling you a ratfscker when no one got a hide for calling Senator Sanders a mother fscker?
Which is worse, really, calling a member of DU a fscker of the Democratic Party or calling a United States Senator running for the Democratic Presidential nomination a fscker of all moms? Why would a member of the 90% expect better treatment than a U.S. Senator running for President?
Seriously, get the fsck over yourself. 
who tell the absolute truth and aren't afraid to do it. You do it with style.
So many brilliant and funny and funny people here - (though there were a lot more 
)
I cannot tell a lie by omission, though: Even though it may look as though I do not pull my punches, I do. Certain things, if stated, would probably result in multiple hides or an instantaneous ban. So I don't state them. I'm not sure why. A ban would probably help me use my time more productively. So, I don't think it's fear. No clue.
