A locking message everyone needs to read and heed:

[LostinVA]

"Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here."



Thank you, Mod. Excellent message.

[Perky]

1. took them 45 minutes to lock it when it should have been deleted

But I appreciate the efforts of the Mods to get it pulled down as well.

[FrenchieCat]

2. I alerted 3 times....and wondered, WTF is going on here?

[Bicoastal]

4. I think alerts are counted by the number of DU'ers alerting....

...not by the number of alerts themselves. I could alert YOU five times in the next five minutes, but it would just mean you have an enemy on DU, not that a general consensus wants the thread to leave.

[MethuenProgressive]

7. Multiple alerts from the same person probably slow down the process.

[D23MIURG23]

43. Mods have a lot on their hands.

Especially this time of year.

[LostinVA]

11. I'm talking about ALL of the RW and RW "lite" garbage on here

Not just that thread. It's gotten out of hand. This isn't Free Republic. You can be snarky about the competition without going bonkers or FR.

[intheflow]

31. 45 minutes is actually pretty good turn-around time.

Think about it like this:

The post is up for 10 or 15 minutes (or longer in many cases) before anyone alerts on it. Unless we happen to stumble upon it ourselves among the hundreds/thousands of daily posts, the mods rely on members to alert us to a problem.

Then, no mod is allowed to act unilaterally to remove or lock any post. So say there are five mods on (sometimes there are more, sometimes less, we don't have set hours). Since all mods are working on different alerts from all the forums/groups at any given time, it can easily take another 1/2 hour before a majority of mods working have read the alert and contributed to the conversation about locking/deleting. During busy times, it can take much longer than that.

And there's your 45 minutes--to insure that no one mod is locking or deleting anything based on political bias or personal vendetta.

It's an imperfect system, but it's very democratic. :patriot:

[Perky]

32. BUT we demand a unitary executive when it fits our needs..LOL

[intheflow]

35. You want a urinary executive?

We already have one of those in the WH! :rofl:

[Bright Eyes]

3. Kick.

We ALL need to chill and stop personal attacks.

[Kolesar]

13. On Love Day...eom

[Barack_America]

5. Exactly. And just some info on the subject of that locked post...

...Just to illustrate that this really is from the *other* side.

This guy is now suing the DNC for "slander". He's representing himself in the lawsuit.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0214081obama1.html

Also, most of the blogs that promoted this video in the first place appear to be associated with Ron Paul.

http://dearmurray.com/why-are-ron-paul-supporters-working-so-hard-to-defame-obama/


Let's step back, take a breath and evaluate the merits of these claims before we allow them to divide us.

[MethuenProgressive]

8. Please, self delete your post. Don't "keep it going"...

[LostinVA]

9. PLEASE delete that -- that's the whole point of my OP

[Barack_America]

12. Why?

People should know that these sorts of tactics are designed to divide Democrats. I don't see any problem in giving some history of that event so that people can see that.

It's in the spirit of the Mod's message...That we should not embrace the tactics designed to divide us. Well, that's exactly the point of this Larry Sinclair guy.

This was not designed by either Democratic campaign. It's Republican strategy.

[LostinVA]

14. Because then this thread will become a "she said/he said" thing

Full of oneupmanship. Like, I can now post something RWish from an Obama supporter. And so on. That's not what I want this to become.

[Barack_America]

16. Don't get me wrong...

I don't regard the person who originally posted that as a true Clinton supporter. That person was acting as a troll. If any other Obama supporter comes into this thread and says otherwise, I'll have something to say about that.

I'm trying to point out that this incident was never a Hillary vs. Obama thing but an example of how dirty the GOP can get.

[stillcool]

27. I have not seen it...

actually I had no idea what this thread was about, or what the offense was. While I agree that continuing nonsensical conversations is a waste of time, and adds more weight and life support to baseless lies and distortions, I am happy to be fore-warned about this kind of shit. Very much like the email slur campaigns.

[NashVegas]

42. I Agree

Whoever posted that was on my ignore list. I had to log out to see the thread.

[truedelphi]

22. I agree. It's one thing to post information to knock down a candidate

It's another thing to let us know what our competition is saying or may be saying in the months ahead. And your post just now falls into the second category.

We are going to hear it on the news anyway. Skinner won't be there to filter the blows.

[MethuenProgressive]

6. Please don't call out the mods when your message isn't responded to as fast as you'd like.

They're doing a thankless job, and doing it extremely well.

[LostinVA]

10. Notice this has 300 views and only 9 responses?

If I had a subject line that was a RW slur against Clinton or Obama, it would have 300 responses. Ugh. This proves the point, eh?

[DURHAM D]

15. The thread calling Hillary a lesbian is still running -

at least the last time I checked. Wonder why?

[Auntie Bush]

19. I've been wondering the same thing.

Why are the rumors about Hillary allowed to be posted? Mods don't seem to care. :shrug:

[DURHAM D]

23. A MOD actually participated in the thread. eom

[Iceburg]

28. Pathetic. /nt

[theHandpuppet]

29. It's that kind of double standard that bothers me

And the fact that threads full of gay-bashing slurs don't seem to get the same consideration. Additionally, is it fine and dandy to call Hillary Rodham Clinton a "shrill bitch" or a "witch"?

Sorry, but I REALLY see a double standard here with regard to which threads get locked and which ones don't.

[theHandpuppet]

30. Because there's a double standard being applied here

That's why. Like no one's hasn't noticed.

[Perky]

37. I alerted and so should everyone else

[tammywammy]

17. Recommended

[LostinVA]

33. Thanks, Tams!

You're my favorite Obama supporter!

pals:

[tammywammy]

38. Thanks!

I get tired of reading all this RW crap about all the candidates. It's really ridiculous. If I wanted to read that crap I'd go to FR.

[calico1]

18. Thank you for the important reminder.

:hi:

[berni_mccoy]

20. Hillary is a Democrat? I thought she was a DLCer...hmmm.

[LostinVA]

21. Please re-read my OP.

[berni_mccoy]

24. I read it. It applies to Democratic candidates. Apparently Clinton feels Winning is more important

Than her party (incendiary tactics to win).

[LostinVA]

34. Yup, you have no desire to "get it"

[applegrove]

25. Great post. Thanks Mod & Skinner et al.

[LostinVA]

26. Thanks

[Guava Jelly]

36. I can't believe the lines people here cross to sell or destroy a candidate.

gd:p is becoming a cesspool of right wing talking points.
I am ashamed of many of my (so called)fellow democrats.

[D23MIURG23]

39. Right on.

[Danger Mouse]

40. it's sad that the mods even need to say this.

:banghead:

[NashVegas]

41. You Know, The Funny Thing?

I just did a search on the term 'constructive criticism' and the threads that had been given that lock? The author(s) were on my ignore list, so I never would have seen them, anyway.

That said, one of those threads was on a subject that has been hinted at for weeks on DU, and it's time it was out in the open and the candidate in question called to answer for it, because there is no fucking way on god's green earth the Republicans will let that be.