OKay, Mods, how do I ALERT on the 2 freeps that UNREC'd my post about Andy?

[elehhhhna]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6023924&mesg_id=6023924

G0DDAngit they helped kill him & now they want to bury him again?

[masuki bance]

1. wow. nt

[lindisfarne]

2. The unrecs could be an expression of opinion based on your failure to include much

content in your OP. I didn't unrec it, but I could see someone doing it.
How do you know it's a "freep"? And really, does it matter?

I'm sorry about your loss, but Rec vs. Unrec status on DU hardly changes the world.

[annabanana]

11. It wasn't HER loss... It was everyone here at DU.. . n/t

[lindisfarne]

12. "your" is 2nd person both Sing & Plural.

I never expect everyone on DU to agree with *anything*. I just can't imagine getting so upset over an "unrec" (from an anonymous person (well, except for the mods knowing), too).

[blm]

20. YOUR reasoning is a nitpicking reach.....and that's your as in YOU...R

.

[lindisfarne]

21. Well, now a number of people are being rational and logical, just like you.n/t

[blm]

26. and if YOU R no friend of Andy's memory, YOU R no friend of mine or 99.9% of DU.

Besides, linking Andy's memory to the current healthcare debate is PRETTY DAMN RELEVANT to any honest progressive, especially at DU.

Her post spoke volumes - not to YOU, apparently.

[lindisfarne]

27. See #24.n/t

[blm]

31. why indulge YOU R rantings when you've no indulgence for a HEARTFELT post Andy and healthcare?

.

[lindisfarne]

34. Do you honestly think you're the only one who has experienced what you experienced?

Getting upset about Unrecs on DU hardly makes the world a better place, or helps with healthcare reform.

But, we're getting nowhere, so good luck to you.

[blm]

37. OMG - YOU R so right...I DID say I was the ONLY ONE who experienced this, didn't I?

Or....YOU R reaching.....again.

[blm]

3. they outed themselves as trolls - not to us, but to the admins who can see who recs and who UNrecs.

.

[provis99]

8. the admins are monitoring our rec/unrec behavior?

Is that you, Big Brother?

[mod mom]

9. They don't belong here.

[lindisfarne]

10. Anyone who disagrees with you for any reason doesn't belong?n/t

[Ignis]

13. Where did she say "for any reason" in her post?

Or are you just making that shit up?

My money's on the latter.

[lindisfarne]

14. "They don't belong here." Said with no understanding of why the "unrecs" were issued. So yes,

it is in fact a statement of 'for any reason'.

There are many possible reasons the Unrecs could have been issued (error, for example, but many others), as I've stated already.

[Ignis]

18. Nice stretch, Plasticman!

But let's be honest for a brief moment, shall we? You have no idea what reasons were involved. You have no idea why Mad Mom think those posters don't belong at DU. You don't even know if she believes the above in relation to those posters disagreeing with her opinion.

You're simply using conjecture to smear Mad Mom.

And I suspect you'd do so again...for any reason.

See how that works? :dunce:

[lindisfarne]

19. See #2. Look at #12 while you're at it. n/t

[Ignis]

36. Those two posts show nothing about MadMom's reasons.

But they do reveal that you consider Andy to have been one of Them rather than one of Us.

That certainly sheds new light on your conjecture. :hi:

I'll leave you to it, since you obviously won't be dissuaded.

[blm]

35. and the ACLU defends KKK, but we're still going to express our disgust with the KKK

.

[blm]

16. where did she say that? This reason is SPECIFIC - it's about ANDY and healthcare.

what's YOUR reason for distorting what she posted?

[lindisfarne]

17. See #14.n/t

[blm]

22. I see that YOUR reaching to argue this is lame....

.

[lindisfarne]

24. Sorry, I have no idea what your point is. But I do wonder how an Unrec can cause such

emotionality, given that you don't know the reason for why they were given in the first place (and given that they mean absolutely nothing, in the bigger scheme of things).

An unrec does not have to be a statement as to the unfairness of Andy's situation.
There can be other, valid reasons, why they might have been issued (such as I expressed in #2).

[Posteritatis]

This site is going to be *hilarious* for the next little while. (nt)

[rucky]

4. Why does everbody blame the Detroit Free Press?

www.freep.com

[redqueen]

5. I would alert on the OP myself, with the comment about what had happened.

But starting a new thread works, too.

[elehhhhna]

6. I thought about that but hell, why not go public?

[BlooInBloo]

7. You just got at least one rec back.

[Th1onein]

15. Two now.

n/t

[SalmonChantedEvening]

23. Make it three. n/t

[Mrs. Overall]

30. +4

[Raine]

32. +5 I gave another one

[Hutzpa]

25. I gave you a rec on this

post and nothing happened, my... my... you must have been freeped.

[grantcart]

28. I wonder how many people hit the wrong button by mistake?

[ContinentalOp]

29. I think recs & unrecs should be public.

A rec or unrec should post a new post to the thread which gets visibly tagged one way or the other. You can then choose whether you actually want to say something or just type k+r or whatever, but you can't rec or unrec anonymously then.

[lindisfarne]

33. Also, there should be an explanation box for why the Rec/Unrec was given. Was it given

for example, for unrecs: because the OP was unclear? Was it given because you felt the original article was biased or too simplistic? Was it given because you have a different point of view, or agree in principle, but not with how the OP has argued the case? For recs: because you agree fully? agree in part? disagree with the conclusion but respect the argument presented? So many possible reasons. These are just a few. (What about "hit the wrong button"?)

[Raine]

38. or posters should be limited on how many

unrecommends they can use per day.

[lindisfarne]

41. And how many recommends per day. n/t

[Raine]

42. I'm not sure

it seems like the unrecommends are the ones that can be a problem, maybe some kind of compromise more for recommends less for unrecommends.

[AllentownJake]

39. It might not be freepers

We have a new toy. Some people might just be unrecommending everything in sight

:shrug:

Ok, I'm being optimistic it was stupidity not trolls.

[lindisfarne]

45. See #43. That person was simply unreccing everything to express disagreement with the feature.

As I said in #2, there are reasons other than disagreeing with the OP's intended message to Unrec.
"Mistake" is another.

[Mrs. Overall]

40. They've also "unrec'ed" this thread.

I think this thing is going to be abused.

[WeDidIt]

43. I was one of the unrecs

I unrec each and every thread I open regardless of content.

It's how I express my opinion of the unrecommend feature.

[Nailzberg]

44. I didn't un-rec the other thread, but I'm unrec'ing this one.