Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:13 PM Jun 2014

DU is not the US government (or any other government for that matter)


if DU removes something from its website, you can still have legal access to read it somewhere else on the internet.

quit acting like no one can read something because it's no longer on du.
38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DU is not the US government (or any other government for that matter) (Original Post) La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 OP
no, we're not; but we do our best to emulate its dysfunction. unblock Jun 2014 #1
Agreed. Juries get things right and wrong but life goes on. hrmjustin Jun 2014 #2
Recommended. Another thing, DU has this feature called trash thread Autumn Jun 2014 #3
People rarely do that Savannahmann Jun 2014 #4
They should use it but it's like you said Autumn Jun 2014 #5
some things while entirely worthwhile otherwise violate DU's community norms La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #6
Very true. But I think a lot of people here don't want to debate things elsewhere. Autumn Jun 2014 #8
Tempest in a teapot. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2014 #7
I see grossly and actually homophobic things on DU regularly which are not just accepted Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #9
i think that those people should have gotten ts'd La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #10
But rather than being ts'd, they are allowd to mount the soapboxes Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #16
+1 In_The_Wind Jun 2014 #11
Sorry if some of us have been here for years, and are sad to see what has happend here. Exultant Democracy Jun 2014 #12
i have been here for years too. La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #13
And you think DU is getting better? You think we should have started block RP in 2003? Exultant Democracy Jun 2014 #14
i think our understanding of what is sexist and what is homophobic has certainly improved La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #17
Ha! I think a private little war has shit all over the sandbox. Stupid people never get satire Exultant Democracy Jun 2014 #19
It's not satire, it's shock- jockery. Not confusing the two is actually an intelligent approach. bettyellen Jun 2014 #29
We're not, but many of us want the site to live up to those ideals. jeff47 Jun 2014 #15
well then IMO you shouldnt be on DU in the first place, as the premise of DU limits free speech La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #18
I don't believe the first amendment should apply to this website. jeff47 Jun 2014 #21
If you're seeing 'plenty of posts' Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2014 #28
yes, yes and yes. Thank you. bettyellen Jun 2014 #30
What I see is people who want a checklist o' offense so that they can be as bigoted as they wish Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #20
i really understand that. i just these as separate issues. La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #23
+1000. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2014 #33
Besides, everyone who's signed up here knows exactly what they signed up for. NuclearDem Jun 2014 #22
and juries might actually get you, even if the hosts are hogtied these days. bettyellen Jun 2014 #27
I don't think that's the point of the criticism. freebrew Jun 2014 #24
it's embarrassing on a site about politics how totally ignorant people are about free speech. bettyellen Jun 2014 #25
Really. Some of the comments over there were stunning in their ignorance of what free speech is. Squinch Jun 2014 #37
I know libertarians aren't all that smart, but damn if it ain't embarrassing to see such ignorance bettyellen Jun 2014 #38
I agree. K & R rollin74 Jun 2014 #26
There you go again, with your rationality and sensible commentary. arcane1 Jun 2014 #31
You are completely missing the point... truebrit71 Jun 2014 #32
No, you completely miss the point. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2014 #34
no, you actually need to read the TOS and decide if you can live with it. bettyellen Jun 2014 #35
again, it's unfortunate that many du'ers seem to not understand community standards La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2014 #36

Autumn

(44,754 posts)
3. Recommended. Another thing, DU has this feature called trash thread
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:19 PM
Jun 2014

if an OP offends you you can use trash thread, if certain words offend you you can trash those by keyword. Those little steps clean up DU nicely. Nothing here is the end of the world as we know it.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
4. People rarely do that
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:21 PM
Jun 2014

If someone finds something offensive, they'll alert to make sure that nobody can read it on DU anyway.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
6. some things while entirely worthwhile otherwise violate DU's community norms
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:23 PM
Jun 2014

those thing get alerted and removed and people here STILL do not lose the right to read it and debate it elsewhere

Autumn

(44,754 posts)
8. Very true. But I think a lot of people here don't want to debate things elsewhere.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:29 PM
Jun 2014

Most web sites I have seen do not even come close to DU. I think it's the best discussion site there is and I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that.

I don't think any DUer should have to go elsewhere to discuss anything. Sometimes a jury gets it right and sometimes a jury gets it wrong. Same as with the hosts.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
7. Tempest in a teapot.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:27 PM
Jun 2014

I wasn't on that jury but from what I've seen of the hidden post I probably would have voted to leave it alone. I'm 70 years old and haven't led a sheltered life and have known to indulge in vulgarities at times, especially when dealing with recalcitrant computers, shrink wrap, and other irritants. I consider profanity my second language but try not to indulge in it when writing or conversation.

Big deal.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
9. I see grossly and actually homophobic things on DU regularly which are not just accepted
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:36 PM
Jun 2014

but lauded. There is a poster who lectures gay people 'you have plenty of rights' she says. If you criticize her, she says 'you hate me because I am an Obama supporter' as if all Obama supporters were saying that shit. Of course, no one complains, the poster's own cohort considers them a superstar poster, and every day we see that shit.
'Gay marriage is to me, unthinkable'. That poster is still here. No one got upset over that real, actual, bigoted desire to prevent others from equality. Unthinkable. Acceptable to DU.
So this affectation over words that are way less harmful than 'there is only one right you don't have....you should be ashamed' says far more about DU than DU thinks it does. Well, about the straight people here and about specific subcultures here. Plenty of rights. Unthinkable.
Whatever.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
10. i think that those people should have gotten ts'd
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 01:52 PM
Jun 2014

but regardless, i dont get this brouhaha over rude pundit. occasionally he says that are not du appropriate and it gets removed from here, he can still be read on his own website

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
16. But rather than being ts'd, they are allowd to mount the soapboxes
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:37 PM
Jun 2014

Among those passing out over RP are folks who cheer them on their soapboxes. That's the point.

Exultant Democracy

(6,594 posts)
14. And you think DU is getting better? You think we should have started block RP in 2003?
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:26 PM
Jun 2014

Al Franken was working pretty blue those days too if I recall, we should have probably blocked him too, right?

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
17. i think our understanding of what is sexist and what is homophobic has certainly improved
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:42 PM
Jun 2014

in the last decade (to reflect societal change in the last decade too)

Exultant Democracy

(6,594 posts)
19. Ha! I think a private little war has shit all over the sandbox. Stupid people never get satire
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:45 PM
Jun 2014

and the stupid here is strong and getting stronger.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
15. We're not, but many of us want the site to live up to those ideals.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:28 PM
Jun 2014

Yes, a hide on DU isn't a constitutional crisis. But many of us believe in the ideals that created the first amendment. As a result, we react rather negatively to "you can't say that".

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
18. well then IMO you shouldnt be on DU in the first place, as the premise of DU limits free speech
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:44 PM
Jun 2014

by blocking out all conservative and rightwing ideas.

i do not your argument. if you believed that the first amendment should apply to this website, you would not be here.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
21. I don't believe the first amendment should apply to this website.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:55 PM
Jun 2014

Reading. It's a good thing to try from time to time.

I think people should be able to have discussions openly. The problem with the conservative trolls is they do not believe so. They believe volume makes up for being false. They have demonstrated that they will disrupt any discussion they can, and so you can't actually have the free expression behind the first amendment with them present.

As for the specific phrase in question, another part of my anger is we are better than that. Declaring "go suck a dick" to be homophobic is to act only on keywords instead of meaning. It's believing that homophobia is not a state of mind, but the use of particular phrases.

"Go fuck yourself" is not anti-sex. In fact, I don't think too many people would find self-copulation to be a bad thing were it physically possible. Similarly, "go suck a dick" is only homophobic if you believe sucking a dick is a bad thing. Is it?

Meanwhile, there's plenty of posts on here that contain actual homophobia. Declaring that "gay marriage" and similar LGBT advances are bad. They don't get hidden, because the posters do not use particular keywords.

We're supposed to be better than that. We're supposed to be the smart ones able to actually read an argument instead of scan for keywords. And in this incident, we massively failed.

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
28. If you're seeing 'plenty of posts'
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:20 PM
Jun 2014

that contain actual homophobia and you're not alerting on them, you're part of the problem.

If you 'want us to be better than that', you need to start with you.

If I see 'actual homophobia', I'm alerting on it, no matter what words are or are not present.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
20. What I see is people who want a checklist o' offense so that they can be as bigoted as they wish
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:46 PM
Jun 2014

as long as they avoid a forbidden vocabulary. So they can spew hate at LGBT people, explain to us that bigotry is not really a bad thing just don't say 'dick' and you can say 'gay should be ashamed' and be a hero of DU.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
23. i really understand that. i just these as separate issues.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 03:16 PM
Jun 2014

i am not sure i would have personally hidden that (although, i would have hidden the one in which he said cunt), but i am ok with something being removed for language that maybe be homophobic or sexist and i am DEF ok with having people who are sexist/homophobic removed from DU

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
33. +1000.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:28 PM
Jun 2014

I saw a number of such demands for 'forbidden vocabulary'.

The reality is, if you use an insult at someone that is based on their inherent properties (or the stereotypes associated with those properties) you're displaying your bigotry. If you use sexual imagery of things stuck inside women's genitals as an insult... you're being misogynistic, no matter what word you're using. If you applaud same, you're applauding misogyny, even if you personally despise the woman in question.

The ironic thing is that today's post from the RP is anti-racism, and quite good. If he would sit back and reflect on misogyny in the same way, and give it the same amount of thought, I doubt he would have written what he did in the post that started the 'tempest'.

And you can certainly object to misogyny without being any kind of 'delicate flower' as so many throwing around childish insults over the last few days have suggested. Misogyny in word adds to the acceptance of misogyny in our culture, and the dismissal of violence against women as being unimportant.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
22. Besides, everyone who's signed up here knows exactly what they signed up for.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 02:55 PM
Jun 2014

No advocating third parties, no crackpot conspiracies, no RW nonsense and no hate speech.

The hide was good.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
27. and juries might actually get you, even if the hosts are hogtied these days.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:18 PM
Jun 2014

it is the ultimate in completely random moderation!

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
25. it's embarrassing on a site about politics how totally ignorant people are about free speech.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:13 PM
Jun 2014

I got a lot of laughs over all the OTT anger, where the hell have they been all these years.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
38. I know libertarians aren't all that smart, but damn if it ain't embarrassing to see such ignorance
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 06:30 PM
Jun 2014

of the issues here on DU. I am surprised no one accused alerters of burning the constitution, LOL.

 

truebrit71

(20,805 posts)
32. You are completely missing the point...
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:23 PM
Jun 2014

The operating principle here should be, 'this offends me so I chose not to view it' and NOT 'this offends me, I want to impose my morality and opinion upon others, therefore it must be removed'...

Fuck that.


Don't like it? Don't fucking read it. Just don't tell everyone else what they can and cannot see because it might conflict with your* own personal feelings...That's what 'ignore' and 'trash thread' are for..



* when I say 'your', I am speaking in general about a poster that acts that way, not YOU personally...

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
34. No, you completely miss the point.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:35 PM
Jun 2014

The operating principle is not 'this offends me', but 'this is hate speech', which is against the Terms of Service.

And given the reactions, it's pretty obvious that the reason so many took offense at the hide was that they do indeed hate Dick and Liz Cheney, and therefore feel there should be an exception to using hate speech against people they feel are deserving of hate.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
35. no, you actually need to read the TOS and decide if you can live with it.
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:57 PM
Jun 2014

What you think "should be" has no bearing on standards here.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
36. again, it's unfortunate that many du'ers seem to not understand community standards
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 05:17 PM
Jun 2014

etc., but that's not my lack of understanding.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»DU is not the US governme...