Not sure how anyone on a Jury would be able to enforce the TOS extensions including:

- Apologist accusations
- Nazi comparisons
- Zionist/Jew; Palestinian/Terrorist conflations
- Use of images, etc.
- Bigotry bias (which has in the past proven to range for blatantly obvious to subtle.)

I have asked Skinner how that would work and how a Jury would know just how this plays out as a general rule in I/P. I've not gotten an answer yet.

A jury just deals with the post itself and decides if it's a violation of the statement of purpose for the group. So if we alert on any posts here, we just point to the old guidelines (or hopefully a revised new flashy edition) and say it's against the statement of purpose?

The admins are trying to work themselves out of a job.

The jury system will not work two different TOS's well, or one which requires deeper subject knowledge.

L-

The first one that sprang to mind for me is what used to be the Gungeon. I don't know the first thing about guns, except that I don't like them, and if I ended up on a jury for an alert from that group, I wouldn't have any deep subject knowledge at all. I'd just have to judge the post based on what the statement of purpose for the group is and hope for the best. When it comes to the do's and dont's of the old forum guidelines, most of them don't need deep subject knowledge. If someone calls another person a name like terrorist apologist or Likudnik, it should be a no-brainer that it's got to be hidden, coz the guidelines don't allow it. And when it comes to bigoted sources, where someone on a jury who hasn't had any exposure to it might get a bit lost, it might help to put a list of bigoted sources in the statement of purpose. Which will end up being a long toilet roll that very few might possibly read, but it's an idea...

Is there any middle ground between using the Jury service system and the old moderating system? I can't think of any, but I wish there was something...

You get into a whole convoluted bit. At its best it is a discussion about the 2nd Amendment, but at its worst it is a flagrant excuse for people who are promoting other agendas.

The forums which has the biggest problem are those involving Civil Rights which does include GLBT, RT and I/P to a large extent. In many respects, you have to have paid your dues before certain topics are even potentially explorable what with the weight of history, the code words and loaded language which often are used and abused by those with agendas.

When it comes to the jury system, I'm sure it'll work well enough for civility issues and people calling each other morons and fascists, but after what I saw in GD this morning, I don't think it's going to work when it comes to alerts concerning bigotry against minority groups, though it sure worked well enough for NASCAR fans being stereotyped in the same thread, I noticed.

US Constitution: 2nd Amendment.

One of my guesses was 'Right....uh...uh...what starts with K?...Bear....Arms'

US Constitution: 2nd Amendment.

Should posts that violate these rules be alerted on or what?

I figure right now the only thing that can really be enforced is the stuff about new threads, right?

That's my impression anyway.

I had been hoping to get a chance to see how it would operate under the new DU system. I was hoping to see a somewhat different dynamic emerge, since I didn't think much of the dynamic on the old board.

Oh well, I guess I'll just put everyone back on ignore that I had on the old DU, and mainly lurk.

No, it won't operate the same. I reposted the above as a starting point.

L-

Or are you going to go over them yrself? If yr looking for input, here's something from me, as I'm in a strictly meta-mood tonight. I've just picked a few bits and not gone over the entire thing...

Under the General heading, ditch the first and last, not coz they're not good, but because going offtopic and selectively quoting things was an everyday happening in the old forum and I don't see how with this new system they could be enforced anyway.

Under Proper use of certain words, I haven't seen anyone call another poster a "Sharonist" since, well, Jabba had his stroke and left the political arena. I guess it could be replaced with "Nuttyist" but that's just coz I like the sound of it and I could even encourage people to use it in order to justify it sitting there in the guidelines!

One specifically that I think should be included is something along the lines of "Don't make sweeping negative generalisations about either Israeli or Palestinian society and culture." There's been more than a few posts doing exactly that in the past, and that's not at all conducive to any sort of constructive discussion...

I dunno. The guidelines need to be compressed a bit so it's not a toilet-roll of rules, and maybe formatted in a way that people should be able to easily copy'n'paste the bit that the post they've alerted on violates the guidelines. Coz I don't think many people selected for a jury are going to have enough motivation or interest to wade through the guidelines and are probably just itching to get back to whatever they were doing before they got the alert...

The TOS ones are only to the extent the Jury system will allow. Truthfully, it is hit or miss to pretty much everyone's chagrin.

L-

If a thread is a SOP violation, or alerted as such, doesn't it just go to you? Also, does the "alerter" get a decision? I am still trying to figure out the "ins and outs" of the new system. Also, take a look at: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12434911 if you have a moment. Thanks.

I've seen blatantly bigoted* posts be let stand by juries, and then yesterday seen the mother of all frivolous alerts luck out when it came to a jury who voted to hide a post that was clearly sarcastic and actually was kinda humourous. It just kind of sucks a lot nowadays, and imo the group has taken a nosedive into bland and humourless territory.


* The most recent ones I've seen is one that was very blood-libelly but I got a 3-3 result when I alerted and so it's not hidden. No-one who voted to let it stand made a comment, btw. The other was a post portraying Palestinians in very RW terms as something akin to sucking off the public teat and being welfare frauds etc. That one also had a split result with one juror who voted to let it stand stating their agreement with what was said.

Too many emotions on the topic (why it is a group in the first place). If I didn't understand this conflict as well as I do, I would likely decline jury duty on posts in here.

Someone linked to uruknet recently. The thread did get locked, but not for about 100 posts. Also, there has been increasing use of right-wing American and British sources. If your source includes either Melanie Phillips OR IfAmericansKnew OR AmericanConservative in its blogroll, the chances are that it's not a very good source!

At one point, I proposed that one should allow right-wing Middle Eastern sources, but not right-wing British or American sources, By now, I'm getting more tempted to propose a ban on the RW Middle Eastern sources too, unless the poster makes clear that they are being used to show one point of view in the ME, not because the poster approves of them.

It's kind of timely reading yr post after the source that's been used for an OP posted today in this group. I wish, though I figure it'll never happen, that ALL RW sources be banned from this group, as well as any that peddle bigotry against Jews or Arabs/Muslims. And repeat offenders should be blocked from the group if they continue to post links to those sorts of sites.

I really miss DU2, even with the flaws it had *sigh*

Last edited Fri Aug 24, 2012, 01:14 PM - Edit history (2)

Do the I/P rules still apply to I/P or is any material acceptable as long as it takes place in Israel?

Isn't I/P a place to discuss I/P related issues?

n/t

If anything the free for all in the other forums during the recent turn of events in Gaza emphasize their relevancy.

If you find something you feel amiss, then please alert.

L-

Of course, not much would after nearly 10 years.

Anyway, don't mind me. After that horrendous Cranberries OP I'm off to start a weekly thread about the new podcast my Westie does. She looks very cute and snarls ineffectually whenever Bibi calls anyone a terrorist.

Not my exact doggo, but they all look similar, though slightly less cute than mine

And those who think I'm being biased - I consider those who have stuck it out a friend.

I am glad you are well. I must assume you are no longer in Uni, but have moved into one of life's other phases. I think you served several terms as a moderator for DU3. I purposefully avoided it as I was a mod for 10+ years on the original DU and DU2 and needed the retirement. A podcast about a Westie sounds extremely fun - if you want, send me the name in DM, I will add it to my podcast list. I wish you luck to to have an engaging audience and maybe earn enough coin to give some wonderful treats to your baby.

DU - I would think even now the same rules are still applicable. The rules have always been governed by the idea both sides have huge issues which people have created deliberate blinders towards. The desire was to keep the field clear and keep out the bias and force people. to talk "raw" and without trying to browbeat others down. People consistently come in thinking one side is somehow morally clean as the other side did something so outrageous. Too many logical fallacies. When times like these happen, emotions are running hard - but this is a forum for discussion - people have to take the pause and engage appropriately

Both Hamas, Hezbollah, and Netanyahu's Israel have gone towards increasing extremes. I do not think the actual population has (for various reasons). I am crying at this moment because of how many innocent people are going to have to pay with their lives.

It's been a long, long time. I still remember all those years ago when I first ventured into the I/P forum and you picked me up on calling another DUer a Liberal. The capitalisation slipped past everyone, but not you I miss Jack Rabbit, bemildred, and Adoneus, as well as a few others.

I figured the guidelines would still apply, especially now. I did look at GD a bit earlier and it's a bit of a trainwreck. If hyperbole, impotent rage and generalisations could solve the conflict, I think GD would solve it singlehandedly.

I knew the attack on Israel was bad when I posted, but the full extent of just how bad wasn't clear to me till the next day. What seems clear to me is that Hamas is trying to drag Israel into a trap, and led by Netanyahu, Israel is going to rush into it and so many Israelis and Palestinians are going to die. It's so, so depressing...