This may not be the best time to say this, but

[soleft]

The next time some high level officials at a corporation committ horrible acts that hurt the economy, I would ask that people not joke about violence against the low level employees of said corporation.

A while back there was post about employees of a certain corporation being warned not to exit the building alone, to travel to and from the office in pairs because of the threat of violence. Someone on DU joked, oh wow, a Twofer.

And there were a lot of other comments about extreme acts of violence against workers, not just the executives, but all employees.

I even thought at the time that my beloved Rachel was using rhetoric that might incite someone to literally take up a pitchfork.

So while I find most people left of center abhor violence and jokes about violence, it has happened here. And we should be mindful going forward.

[OneGrassRoot]

1. I agree. n/t

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Nothing wrong with advocating for justice in a court of law.

[el_bryanto]

4. That's kind of a non-sequiter

Of course there isn't any thing wrong with advocating for justice in a court of law; why would there be?

Bryant

[seabeyond]

3. one would think jokes about raped wouldnt be had, but it has. big difference comments on a board

and things being said by left media and politicians.....

we wont be able to make everyone "be nice" on du. what most of us do though, is call the person out for crassness.

[obxhead]

6. Is there though?

Think about that a bit. I'm sure it will come out that this shooter made many despicable comments of violent hate on a message board. To take this further, one of the reasons Palin feels her map is ok is because of the comments constantly made by her followers. The powerful people that make these dangerous comments are often fed through their base being acceptable and even encouraging them.

Yes we are only anonymous bloggers, not politicians on the TV, but that doesn't mean we should be part of the problem.

[seabeyond]

7. i am not a part of a "problem". i am very conscious of my posts. i dont have to be ugly. BUT

there are a handful on du that gets pleasure at being nasty at all costs. always have been, always will be. just saying.

my sons and i talk often how i feel that the internet has allowed ugliness to feed from the internet to every day life. i think this is one of the greatest harm that internet has contributed to society.

and yes, though i actively work towards civility, i think that there is a difference between a blogger and politician and media. they could be fired, or not elected by there behavior. they can control themselves if we demand. to an extent du is pretty good and ensuring civility and gets their ass reemed for it.

[obxhead]

9. I was not implying or accusing you

in any way of these kinds of posts. I apologize if it came across that way.

I just wanted to say I think the things said on our blogs do have consequences. Not to the same level as a politician or pundit, but they do encourage those politicians and pundits at the very least.

[seabeyond]

10. smilin

i didnt think you were implying. i posted like that to make my point. and i guess we agree

[Jamastiene]

5. You should alert anything like that.

Agreed, but next time, by all means, alert on posts that advocate violence. They do not belong on DU. It is in the rules.

[tabatha]

8. Yep - sometimes Mike Malloy goes too far,

[kath]

11. Oh, c'mon -- do you think talking about "taking up pitchforks" is the same as putting

crosshairs on a congressperson's name/district, having a campaign rally where M16s would be shot (like Giffords' opponent), talking about "2nd amendment solutions", or showing up at campaign events fully armed???

Really?


Where would I even FIND a pitchfork? Really.