Take Rec/Unrec out of the GLBT Forum.

[Pab Sungenis]

There are a number of forums where Rec/Unrec just aren't allowed. The Israel/Palestine one, for example. Or the 9/11 dungeon.

The recent assault on a number of threads in the GLBT forum by the Unrec brigade, who seem to take personal offense at any implication that President Obama is doing anything less than feeding GLBT Americans cake and singing them lullabies at bedtime every night, lead me to suggest that it's time that our forum have Rec and Unrec turned off.

This should be our safe haven. I don't want those who think that we're less than fully human to decide which of our topics are important and which are not.

[laconicsax]

1. Unrec for whining about the unrec feature. n/t

[Pab Sungenis]

2. My point exactly.

Go away.

[laconicsax]

6. Why do you feel the need to stifle discussion?

I can assure you I'm not going away just because you whined at me.

[Pab Sungenis]

19. You aren't discussing.

You're just unrec'ing for no good reason. And, as I said, I don't think this forum should be part of the race for recs and unrecs. I don't want non-GLBT's, and especially not anti-gay DU'ers, ranking our posts.

[laconicsax]

20. This is a discussion forum.

Rec/unrec is a minor feature. Whining about it is equivalent to complaining about the napkin color at a restaurant.

Fortunately, there's a LGBT group where you can post to your heart's content without worry of someone "ranking" your posts.

Try it out.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=412

[The Philosopher]

22. Well, for one...

"You must be a donor to post in the 'Groups' section."

[laconicsax]

24. So donate $5.

If you can't afford it, you can always make a post asking for a star.

[The Philosopher]

25. Make a post asking for a star?

What do you mean?

[laconicsax]

26. Post in GD or the Lounge asking for a donor star.

Kinda tacky, but I've seen it done.

[The Philosopher]

27. Oh

I'm not going to do that. I'm not that important.

[WillParkinson]

46. Why do you feel the need to stifle discussion?

"Unrec for whining about the unrec feature. n/t" is not discussion.

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. Rec for exactly the same reason. nt

[Skittles]

12. rec for supporting cowards' use of unrec

[laconicsax]

16. Nice straw man!

Disliking whining about a minor feature=supporting trolls? :rofl:

With all the whining about unrecs, you'd think it was the primary aspect of DU. It isn't. Who is so narcissistic that they give a shit if their thread makes it to the Greatest Page or Main Page?

Let the homophobes unrec threads in GLBT. It doesn't change the content of the OP, and it doesn't stifle discussion. At most, it encourages a brief, whiny sub-thread. If someone's so insecure in their position that the idea of someone else anonymously clicking a button is terrifying, they have two options: post in the echo-chamber of groups or realize that not everyone is going to agree with everything they say and harden the fuck up.

[Skittles]

17. who said ANYTHING about TROLLS?

I detest UNREC - I see it as cowardice, period

[elocs]

18. Well, even Skinner has said he considers the complaining about UnRec to be "whining".

The merit of any thread is not based upon how many Recs it gets and no amount of UnRecs may diminish the truth.

[laconicsax]

21. Thank you. n/t

[Skittles]

28. I don't care

I think it STINKS

[elocs]

38. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

But this site belongs to Skinner and he makes the rules.

[Skittles]

41. rules can be changed

[WillParkinson]

29. Skinner is not always correct

He has his personal belief of what it is.

The thing is that I see those who complain about the discussion to be 'whining' just as much. "We like unrec. Don't get rid of it! Noooo." Same thing.

[elocs]

39. Who is always correct? But this site belongs to Skinner so his opinion does carry weight. n/t

[WillParkinson]

40. That I will not deny...

But I will contend that if the comments on one side are considered whining the same can be said for both sides.

[WillParkinson]

47. Or run to the ATA board and ask for them to make rules about it...

Which, of course, is not any type of whining whatsoever.

[Sweet Charming Dem]

23. +1

[Smarmie Doofus]

4. Seriously.... it's an interesting idea.

I personally don't mind the unrecs..... and usually they get outvoted in time as the thread leaves the big board.

[gateley]

5. Did you post a request in the Ask the Admins forum? That might help. Rec, by the way!

[greyl]

7. Bad idea.

Reason #1: no threads from this forum could be on the Greatest Page

[FreeState]

8. There already is an LGBT forum set up like that - leave this one alone IMO

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=412

In order to post in a forum that disalows recommending you have to be a donating member - we need this forum as it is

[Chulanowa]

9. Well, what you're missing in the comparison...

Is that the feature is removed from those particular forums because both are completely full of shit and crazy. I should know, I contribute often to the shit and crazy of one of them :) it's an effort to keep these topics from appearing on the greatest page, and making DU look, well, full of shit and crazy.

[greyl]

10. Yep. nt

[donheld]

11. No

[msongs]

13. it is the DU equivalent of DADT nt

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

14. right... clicking the unrec button is the same as DADT...

unrec... because I can.

[TriMera]

15. Rec because it was at 0. n/t

[LonePirate]

30. Rec\Unrec is not the problem, it's the anti-LGBT bigotry and ignorance by so many DU members

Many members here have no concept, understanding or sympathy for what LGBT members are experiencing in life right now. They would rather stick their heads in the sand instead of standing alongside their fellow DUers and Democrats.

[racaulk]

31. I totally agree.

The rec/unrec feature is a benign function of this site. It's how people use it, and the animus behind their actions, that is the real problem. That is what should be addressed.

[Evasporque]

32. I am a wreck...over all this unrec'ing and rec'ing....nt

[GodlessBiker]

33. I think Rec/Unrec should be everywhere, but if they remove it elsewhere they should remove it here.

[QC]

34. This *should* be our safe haven,

but it hasn't been for a very long time.

In the real world, gay neighborhoods are the places where one is most likely to be bashed, because they are where the bashers go to find easy prey.

Something similar has been going on in this forum for about three years now.

[racaulk]

35. +1

Very well said. :thumbsup:

[QC]

36. Thank you! n/t

[theHandpuppet]

48. Yep.

Some seem to visit the GLBT forum only to unrec threads. It's been going on for a long time now and gets much worse every time an election nears.

[pgodbold]

37. Get rid of Unrec. A low or high positive number is sufficient. Unrec is used by losers. nt

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

42. No. We have another forum that we can use. Glbt threads deserve to be on the front page

[ruggerson]

43. completely disagree

important posts here routinely make it to the greatest page and gain wider exposure.

And we already have an activism group that has no rec/unrec.

[Rowdyboy]

44. Disagree 100%. Your plan exiles our issues from the Greatest Page and stifles debate.....

Very bad idea

[FreeState]

45. It also locks out new members who may need help

You have to be a donor to post in the other type of groups - which would lock out people that may need help and ask for it here (which has happened in the past).