Let's all re-commit ourselves to civil participation.

[Skinner]

Obviously, things have never been completely civil in this forum. They tend to go in waves of civility and incivility. I'm getting the sense that we are heading toward one of our low points, and I'm hoping that everyone will make an extra effort to not go there.

I think that it is only natural that we have some good times and some bad times. But the moderators and I are going to do the best we can to be both aggressive and fair when we try to head off the worst.

I think part of the problem is that the moderators and I have backed off a bit recently. This is probably two reasons: 1) things seemed to be relatively positive so we didn't want to be too in-your-face, and 2) we were getting gun-shy because of the old "why-did-you-delete-this-but-not-this" game that is simply impossible for us to ever win.

Our goal is to provide a place where we can all discuss the issues in an atmosphere of mutual respect. But the moderators and I can't make that happen on our own. We need your help if we are ever going to realize that goal. I respectfully request that you do the following:

1. Treat other people with respect. And participate in a respectful manner.

2. Recognize that the rules of the GD:2004 forum are very strict, and disallow *all* uncivil behavior. The rules explicitly give the moderators the authority "to remove any post of any kind, which they consider to be contrary to our goal of civil discourse."

3. Re-read the rules for the GD:2004 forum, and follow them. They are here.

4. Take advantage of the "ignore user" feature and the "hide thread" function.

5. Hit the alert link when you think someone is out of line. And if nothing happens after a while, feel free to hit alert again and politely explain the issue so the moderators understand.

6. Remember that the moderators and administrators are human, and we make mistakes. If you think we have made an error, feel free to appeal a removed post. But please be polite when you appeal; it will dramatically increase your chances of getting the desired result.

Have you figured out the super-secret formula for not getting your posts removed? It's actually quite simple. If you are trying to participate in a respectful and positive manner, then you won't have any problems. But if you are trying to figure out ways to be rude, then you are taking a risk and you'll likely get into trouble.

Furthermore, I'm tired of receiving rude messages from people, and I'm tired of people ragging on the moderators and calling them biased. This is an extremely difficult job, and the appearance of inconsistency is inevitable. We get about 20,0000 new messages every day, and we can't read all of them. Regardless of which candidate you support, you could easily find dozens of posts to "prove" that your guy is being treated unfairly. And when your guy is the frontrunner, it seems doubly so, because everyone is gunning for your candidate. That's just natural.

Please be aware that I am instructing the moderators to take a more aggressive approach toward civility enforcement in this forum. Hopefully this will provide you with more of an incentive to be respectful.

Please remember that ultimately we are all on the same side. I'm sure we all agree that the purpose of this whole primary is to pick our standard-bearer in the fight against the illegitimate, unelected moron in the White House.

Thank you for your understanding.

Skinner
DU Admin

[maddezmom]

1. thanks skinner

I'm in. :)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. I'll re commit myself because the forum is much more valuable that way

I fell off the wagon yesterday and I apologize.

[jean]

3. Amen!

[ShaneGR]

80. Praise Jesus!

Can I get a "WOOT!"

[Dark Star]

4. You wrote:

"...Please remember that ultimately we are all on the same side. I'm sure we all agree that the purpose of this whole primary is to pick our standard-bearer in the fight against the illegitimate, unelected moron in the White House..."

There are now threads where DUers have actually written they will vote for Bush as a protest! This is very upsetting, however I promise to remain civil.

[Zomby Woof]

5. "illegitimate, unelected moron"

I knew Bush was always a bastard! :-)

I can speak as someone FAR from perfect with my behavior, and say without reservation or hesitation, that you, Elad, EarlG, and the entire mod team are fair and patient to ends above and beyond your natural right to be so.

Thanks for the nudge, and I hope, like with the clean slate on the warnings, we can make the best of it.

[Paragon]

6. Yes, I need to be committed

:silly:

[seaglass]

7. I'm glad that there will be a more agressive approach.

And personally I think that letting up a little leads to people pushing the boundaries - when it's seen that one person can get by with an inflammatory post/thread and that person is against your candidate, the urge to repay the favor is almost overwhelming.

Thanks. I know this is really hard work and I'll try my best not to be rude.

[sangh0]

8. Thanks for the reminder, Skinner

I had a suspicion the mods were backing off a bit (and I sympathize with the reasons for doing so) and I think the resulting incivility has affected me so I am now going to re-commit myself to civility.

Keep up the great work

[Iverson]

65. same here

And in that spirit I reach for one of those rare and glorious occasions to agree with sangh0.

Keep up the good work.

[sangha]

71. The same goes for me too!

:-)

[Democrats unite]

9. I am committed to making sure we have the right nominee

Not censorship & IMO sometimes things are ridiculous here.

[Skinner]

14. I have done my best to balance the interests of everyone here.

We have had three votes in the last two weeks, and each time there was a clear majority in favor of strong enforcement instead of adolescent ranting.

I understand that many people don't like being told that they have to be civil. I wish I could satisfy everyone, but I have come to terms with the fact that some people are not going to like the way we run this message board.

[Clark Can WIN]

10. I can't imagine anyone who could be so CLASSLESS as to

rag on the mods and call them biased. How juvenile.

I'll take up your call and work to be as civil as possible, thanks Skinner.

[NNN0LHI]

23. Yea. That one surprised me too n/t

[xultar]

11. You are right it was down right cozy there for a few days, but

it seems overnight the lil ole' nasty man has come back to visit.

[PATRICK]

12. Predictable emotions

Considering the stakes the eventual pain of defeat cuts very raw. Also predictable is what happens in political competition and what heat a frontrunner attracts. It is impossible to keep a calm perspective on ourselves at all times as events unroll so many thanks should be given to the moderators to weather the temporary storms.

Just play the name change game with your negative feelings. The names can be all interchangeable. It only depends on what frosts our own loyalties.

We need more posts on how to build a winning campaign. Raising money. Tying new volunteers and organizations together. Getting the message out. Barraging systematically all the newspapers of the country with the good stuff, not clone droning fakery as spews from the other side. And GOTV is more vital than ever for the survival of democracy itself.

[papau]

13. I - and everyone -appreciate your getting in our face -Rules are necessary

And this board is a wonderful creation because of your rules.

:-)

And no - this not meant as a suck up so I can post more 5 paragraph/sentence wire services reports! (I really do try to limit them - and it seems I need to be told now and then when I have bent the rules too much in the direction of understandability over the need to meet copyright rules).!!!! (I do feel guilt - its that church upbringing problem!)

:-)

"civility enforcement" seems to be a problem only in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary posts - I suspect once the dust settles, we will all be on the same page.

[CWebster]

15. Lol....

Why do you even bother?

[Skinner]

17. LOL. I wonder why I bother.

I feel like that guy from Greek myth who keeps rolling that boulder up the hill and then it rolls right back down.

I guess I bother because the members of DU believe it is possible for DU to be better than it is. It's my job to do what I can to make that happen.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

21. Sisyphus

Yet, defying the gods again, Sisyphus is without hope. He abandons any illusion that he might succeed at the assigned task. Once he does this, Camus considers him a hero. Sisyphus begins to view his ability to do the task again and again -- to endure the punishment -- a form of victory.

"The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. We have to imagine Sisyphus happy."
http://www.amychaves.bizland.com/articles/on_albert_camus.htm

[arwalden]

32. Portrait Of Skinner... Nice Muscles, Dude

[waldenx]

16. civility enforcement

the threat of punishment is not an "incentive" it is coercion.
Might as well be honest about it.

[Skinner]

19. Yes, it is coercion.

Most members are perfectly capable of acting in a civil manner without my telling them what to do. Unfortunately, it seems that some people respond better to the threat of punishment.

[Cuban_Liberal]

18. I make a concerted effort to be civil at all times.

It's not hard to be civil, frankly; you can even make VERY 'pointed' replies without breaking the rules, if you just THINK before you type. :)

[Cuban_Liberal]

20. Kick!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

22. Three cheers for aggressive enforcement! Hip-hip-hooray!

Especially the 'unambiguously positive' rule concerning posts about other DU members.

BTW, you said awhile back in ATA that you were going to remove rule 8 -- is that still the plan? If you don't plan on enforcing the rule, it seems like it should be removed.

[Skinner]

24. I think I'm going to re-write it.

We have been enforcing it in extreme cases. But we haven't been enforcing it when the alleged "factual assertion" is realtively insignificant.

[Vis Numar]

25. yea right, why the timing?

My problem with you on this Skinner is the timing. Dean's been getting trashed and bashed on DU for over 6 months, and you've done little to nothing in stopping Kerry people.

But now, Kerry is ahead, and you want civil enforcement. Nope. You need to step aside and let us lock horns. I want the time and space to bash and trash Kerry that you gave to those Dean bashers.

Besides, Kerry is the worst possible thing for the Democratic Party in 2004.

[Skinner]

26. My timing is just fine.

We instituted a strict new set of rules on the Thursday before the Iowa caucus, when Dean was still the frontrunner. And after the Iowa caucus the moderators locked or deleted scores of posts calling Dean a maniac and a circus clown because of the scream. Dean has benefitted from this too. The implication that I am somehow trying to protect John Kerry is simply wrong.

[genius]

28. I'm not for Kerry but it looked to me like Kerry was getting trashed

more than Dean over the last six months. Kerry's record is pretty good although I disagree with some of his key votes on issues I care about. I used to work on the Dean campaign but I quit after I saw where Dean stood on the issues and after I found out about that petition asking Kucinich to drop out. Much of the negativity in this race has come from the Dean campaign. It did not help Dean in the first two primaries and the Dean campaign needs to learn from Edwards and Kerry that a positive campaign goes further with the voters.

[Dark Star]

29. Speaking just for me,

I disagree with your post. To you, it seems that Dean was getting mistreated; to others, believe me, they see it differently. We must have some empathy here with other people's positions!

For example, your slam on Kerry probably offends the Kerry people. Can't you see how subjective this is?

Let's keep our eyes on the prize of sending the village idiot back to Crawford.

BTW, someone mentioned something about posting ideas which sounded like a great way to beef up the activism forum. Everything needn't go into this one!

Cheer up, things could be worse :silly: ; so, I cheered up and, sure enough, things got worse !:freak:


:grouphug:

[JohnLocke]

76. Here, Here!

;)

[freetempe]

58. I agree with Vis

Threads trashing Dean are all over the place, yet Kerry-bashing threads are locked up right away. I read this board a lot, I see it happening every day. I understand the difficult decisions you have to make in moderating this board but please do a better job locking up the Dean bashing threads. Thanks.

[mzmolly]

27. I try to remain committed, but I think this thread is about 3 months

too late. Oh, how I would have appreciated it when Dean was the front runner.

[slinkerwink]

30. exactly......

[Skinner]

31. I think that whatever I try to do, whenever I try to do it...

will be dismissed by some as "too little, too late." It is easy to look back across the months and point out all the things that I could have done differently. Hindsight is 20/20. But this is the first presidential primary we have ever had on DU, and I sure didn't know what to expect, and I sure didn't understand how some people could take their candidate choice so personally. In short: I am learning.

We had a set of rules in place that served us well for nearly three years, and I thought it was a bad idea to mess around with those rules. I had very little interest in becoming the speech police, and I have resisted it for as long as I have run DU. Perhaps some of you would relish the responsibility of telling people what they are allowed to say or think, but it is not something I enjoy doing, even now that it is official DU policy. Personally, I can't wait till this primary is over so I can get rid of these draconian rules, and so we can go back to fighting over religion and Ralph Nader.

I took action because ultimately I felt I had no other choice. My preference was always to just let people say what they want to say, but the chorus of complaints was just too loud for me to ignore. I am doing the best that I can under extremely difficult circumstances. Unfortunately, it is much too late for me to go back and undo the decisions I made three months ago.

[CWebster]

33. The chorus of complaints?

Don't be steered by the mob.:D

[Vis Numar]

38. OK

So, three months ago, you admit to screwing up, and letting the dialogue go into gutter here. Fine, but you can't undo the fact that it was the Kerry people who did that against Dean, and now you are merely trying to wash your hands clean.

YOu can't have it both ways Skinner.

You say: "Personally, I can't wait till this primary is over.."

Yea, I bet, now that Kerry is ahead.

[Skinner]

39. The charges of bias against me are totally without merit.

I am only trying to do what is necessary to keep this website from exploding.

[Vis Numar]

41. There is no such thing as non-bias

The institution of these rules that change the playing field at a time when Kerry is strongest, as opposed to 8 weeks ago, is totally biased. Don't play word games here Skinner.

You cannot deny that your trying to regain control at this time hurts Deaniacs, while we are trying to take down Kerry. It's total bullshit from my perspective, to see you waltz in and announce these rules exactly at the time of Kerry's rise to the top (a week before Iowa). I want the same rights that the Kerry people had here for 6 months, which was to rip and tear and distort and lie about Dean at every opportunity they could want.

If you don't see the bias in this decision, you are blind.

I left this site because of the filth that Kerry people were spreading about Dean, and you let it happen. Now, I come back to see how the Deaniacs are ripping Kerry back, and you've got your new friggin rules. It sucks, and is totally biased toward Kerry; whether you think it has merit or not, the facts of timing speak for themselves.

[Skinner]

45. I think I'm done with this particular line of discussion.

I am sorry that you feel the way that you do.

[drfemoe]

50. Part of your arguement has merit **

I wouldn't wish the same wholesale toilet paper treatment Dean received on anyone, even JK. I don't see anything in the rules that prohibits honest personal opinions. It doesn't appear that legitimate documentation from other sources will be automatically ejected from the discussion. I would much rather win a debate with substantial evidence, rather than juvie dirty tricks. Please let me know if I'm mistaken in my interpretation of the rules.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[edzontar]

70. I agree. Whatever the good intentions in general....

The coincidence of this notice with the emergence of Kerry as the front-runner is going to turn some heads and confirm some of the most conspiratorial and negative opinions of DU "bias."

For those of us who have endured--despite constant protest- three months of unmitigated Dean bashing, this new call for civility is a bitter pill indeed.

Speaking for myself, I believe that what was deemed appropriate for my candidate should be permitted for any one of the others.

We shall see how this works out in practice.

[MaineDem]

34. Thanks

Your job is not easy and I for one appreciate all that you and the moderators do to keep things civil.

This is still the best web site and will continue to be so because of you.

[kaitykaity]

35. As one who was guilty

once of being rude in an appeal message, I will
try not to let the heat of the dispute on the board flow
over into the appeals process. (It is tough, however.)

Skinner, you gotta stop taking all of the flak we give
you personally. I hope you know we :loveya: you.

(Not sucking up or anything.) :hi:

[Duncan Grant]

36. My Heroes! ;)

I can't imagine any of you are enjoying the wear and tear that comes with the job these days.

What really rings true in your post is the call for mutual respect. I'm certainly not the poster boy for the 'Ideal DUer' (but I do give money -- because membership has it's privileges! :7).

I hope we can all lift the tone of the discourse here to a more thoughtful and enlightening level.

With appreciation for all your efforts on our behalf! :yourock:

[Dookus]

37. thanks Skinner....

I promise to try.

I must say, though, I find it really funny that some people are complaining that the rules weren't in force months ago. These were the same people screaming their heads off at any attacks on their candidate. Now they want the right to do it to other candidates. It reminds me of nieces and nephews fighting.

[KC21304]

42. You have that right. I would love to have someone

able to compare number of positive and negative posts against candidates done here in the last year. I know that would be impossible but I would bet on those results anytime.

[piece sine]

40. you gotta do what you gotta do...

but I am so thin-skinned when it comes to censorship. When it happens to me, I get a lump in my throat because someone just censored my opinion simply because I employed lucid or colorful prose. And when it DOESN'T happen to others in somewhat equal measure, I feel singled-out and force myself to stay away from DU until I cool-off, or until current new events prompt me return to see how other lefties are handling either good or bad news.

It's been a rough primary season, but I wonder if you and the moderators fully evaluate the impact on an ernest participant when that person's sentiments are literally eliminated but an unseen censor.

[Skinner]

44. Believe me, we do.

We think about it all the time. Unfortunately, there are no perfect solutions. In fact, under the circumstances there are no solutions that are even remotely good. Every option available to us is guaranteed to anger a large number of people.

[piece sine]

47. Then you're a "stand-up" kinda guy

and I admire that in any person. Maybe YOU should run for President!

[tishaLA]

43. Thanks Skinner

But I've never even had ONE deleted post. Can I just lack civility ONCE please? I wanna see what it feels like.

[janx]

48. Here come the ALERT wars again...

[Malikshah]

49. Waves of civility etc.

It would be interesting if there could be a study of these waves...

I have noticed they coincide with posters--some go away for a while, and when they come back.

Yes, yes--I'm being vague. I'm not planning on "pointing fingers"

It would be worthwhile, however, to note the changes in a quantifiable fashion.

Of course--this is dissertation worthy, and thus a waste of time in some minds. :)

[Skinner]

53. The danger in this thinking...

...is that it allows people to think that incivility is caused by somebody else, which allows them to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions.

But I think it is obvious to everyone that some people find civility more difficult than other people.

[Malikshah]

57. I agree re: the danger

But on the other hand (forgive I'm an academic so there's always another hand) to write off the patterns that become apparent is just as dangerous.

My initial post wasn't to say that so and so is uncivil (that is in the eye of the beholder) rather it should have focused on pointing out that the argument over civility may have to also include a discussion of "agitators"

We have any number of folks who post here regularly and it will become less than civil at times. That's life. All are guilty---no white hats, etc.

It was just a pipe dream, I know-- but I've noticed through reading over the last few months that there are definite waves of incivility that are begun by folks from a number of campaigns. What I had noticed that there are actually just a few involved in agitating.

(I have this image of Stewie from Family Guy getting the kids to fight and then leaving while saying "Dance, puppets, dance!)

More power to you and the others for handling this herd of cats that we all belong to!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

51. Question about civility.

I'm pretty sure that I understand what it means to behave in a civil manner. But some here seem to construe 'civility' as meaning 'not saying anything that might hurt someones feelings'.


That's not what we are shooting for here, is it? Aren't we allowed to say things, that might get some people upset, as long as we state it in a civil manner?

[Skinner]

52. For us, it generally boils down to this:

For the most part, civility isn't really about what you say. It's more about how you say it.

You can say that you think a candidate is not trustworthy. But you can't say he's a lying sack of shit.

You can write five thoughtful paragraphs about a candidate's record. But you can't start a one-sentence thread topic that boils a candidate's record down to one word.

You can call a post incorrect. But you can't call it Bullshit.

You can start a thread about an issue. But you can't if there are already a half dozen other threads open on that issue.

Of course, there are also some things that you can't say at all, and our rules outline most of those. You can't make broad-brush statements about candidate's supporters. You can't discuss the messenger rather than the message. Etc.

But generally, you are permitted to discuss most issues provided that it is done in a civil manner. The fact that some people don't want to hear something does not make it out of bounds.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

54. Informative clarifying post.

Thank you.

[KC21304]

60. I am a little confused.

In the post of mine above, that was deleted, I inquired about a post that as far as I can tell, beside insulting you, violated just about every rule that you just laid out here. And your answer to him was you are sorry he feels that way. And your answer to me is deletion. I actually thought my post was a humorous one and was intended to show support for you.

Go fiqure.

[Skinner]

62. While I appreciate the thought

I felt that your post was not helpful. You were not given a warning.

[KC21304]

68. Thanks for the leniency on the warning,

but why do I have the feeling that if I were as "helpful" as another poster here, I might be " pushing up daisies" ? LOL . Oh well, some times it is hard to teach an old broad new tricks.

[mitchum]

55. I'm trying....

and Skinner says, "Oh God yes, You are very trying indeed"

Thanks for the second chance,
mitchum

[Skinner]

56. LOL

:D

[Duncan Grant]

59. Skinner, can I ask an indelicate question please?

What's the point of having a barrage of "Anti-(your candidate here)" posts from the same author, hour after hour, day after day.

Hypothetically, if I worked in some capacity for the Dean campaign (and I don't) and my job was to spam this board with every disruptive technique available (bending the rules, not breaking them)...would you ban me?

If I had a record of posts (available using the search function) that proved my disruptive pattern here at DU...would you ban me?

And if you wouldn't ban me, I know just the job I'm applying for next!

Thanks a million!

[Skinner]

63. If we notice a pattern of disruptive behavior

we would certainly discipline you in some way.

[ibegurpard]

61. I have a question

And I'm not a big fan of instituting more rules because people just use them as weapons to try to get other members. What might be the reaction if I were to alert on someone who invaded a thread that was not critical in any way of another candidate just to post a snarky remark? I ask that because when that happens, if it's not against the rules, I'm going to retaliate. I also find it rather ironic that certain people in this very thread who call for civility are guilty of this. Yes, we're ALL angels when we appeal to the admins, aren't we? LOL

On edit: see this thread for a few examples of what I'm talking about: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=236565&mesg_id=236565

[Skinner]

64. You should alert on posts like that.

If a post is particularly off-topic and snarky, then it would be removed as "contrary to our goal of civil discourse."

But if you choose to "retaliate" please be aware that you are expected to follow the rules. Otherwise you'll get your post deleted as well.

[ModerateMiddle]

69. "I'm going to retaliate"

Therein lies the problem. Most folks know that a snarky comment is more of a commentary on the poster than the candidate they are being dismissive of or rude about.

Is it that hard to roll your eyes and move on?

[VOX]

66. R-E-S-P-E-C-T to all DUers, and thanks to admins and mods...

Since we all received an inadvertent tabula erasa on warnings the other day, the time is good to re-commit to civility and respect.

I've so far refrained from getting into the virtual dust-ups, but the temptation has been there, and so it must be for most of us.

Skinner, you -- and the admins and the extended mod family -- are to be commended (yet again) for wrangling this spirited but often contrary herd on the path to civil behavior.

Thanks for the reminder, and I hope that all DUers pull together on this. In the end, all we have is each other, and that's a treasure not to be taken lightly.

[ModerateMiddle]

67. I've never had a post deleted

because I manage to make the kinds of posts that WOULD be deleted out loud, here at home, and don't try to post them.

I recognize that I am not going to change anyone's mind about nearly anything. And I don't take things personally.

And I frequently leave when I get upset about a thread or poster.

Stress Management 101.

[LeftPeopleFinishFirst]

72. thanks, skinner

nt

[Endangered Specie]

73. I will be civil, I 'usually' am

We are human after all.

[wabeewoman]

74. Thanks for the reminder.

Reading some of the posts sometimes feels like getting gut-punched and unfortunately, makes me want to respond in kind. However, I will make EVERY effort to comply or go elsewhere and cool off.

[0rganism]

75. How about we just re-commit ourselves?

Somewhere, an asylum has lost its lunatics!

[mopinko]

77. they are here, at my house

and being the mod HERE, i can really appreciate the thanklessness of your job, skinner. thanks for keeping this little cyberhome from exploding.

[Forkboy]

78. Enforcing civility is like enforcing morals

ugly and a waste of time anyways :shrug:

[blm]

79. bump

.