2016 Postmortem

tavernier

(12,368 posts) Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:22 AM Oct 2015

Not sure where to post this but please DO NOT

ask me to adjudicate the posts from GDP any more!

I am a professional person and I have a job that requires my full attention. At the same time, I feel that I have a commitment to DU. When they ask me to serve on the jury, I take it seriously, as it generally only takes a few moments of my time.

However, lately the only arguments I've been asked to settle are childish hissy fits between people fighting for their candidates. (I'm really cleaning it up here).

Go at it tooth and nail, if you like, but stop trying to make it into Hitler versus Stalin.

We get it... You don't like him/her.

Sadly, you're hurting all of our candidates with this vitriol.

Take a breath, remember who you
are, and why it is really important for Dems to win next year.

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Not sure where to post this but please DO NOT (Original Post) tavernier Oct 2015 OP

I Just Requested Not To Be Included In Any Future Juries For The Same Reason. left on green only Oct 2015 #1

If you get on a jury that is from GDP, you can always opt out. CaliforniaPeggy Oct 2015 #2

With you 100%. cheapdate Oct 2015 #3

Just opt out of the jury yeoman6987 Oct 2015 #4

I opted out of jury duty nearly a year ago. SheilaT Oct 2015 #5

I have stayed with jury duty, BUT murielm99 Oct 2015 #6

I serve whenever asked, even in GDP, but Blue_In_AK Oct 2015 #7

Some posters should be alerting on themselves Fumesucker Oct 2015 #8

left on green only

(1,484 posts)

1. I Just Requested Not To Be Included In Any Future Juries For The Same Reason.

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:47 AM

Oct 2015

CaliforniaPeggy

(149,516 posts)

2. If you get on a jury that is from GDP, you can always opt out.

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:48 AM

Oct 2015

That might be a good way to handle it.

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)

3. With you 100%.

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:50 AM

Oct 2015

Alas, I don't think there's anything to be done.

Cheap shots are far easier than counter-arguments.

I've tried to remind people over and again that the candidate you're showering with epithets just might be the Party's nominee.

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)

4. Just opt out of the jury

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:16 AM

Oct 2015

That way you save time and frustration.

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)

5. I opted out of jury duty nearly a year ago.

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:26 AM

Oct 2015

It was a very good decision.

murielm99

(30,712 posts)

6. I have stayed with jury duty, BUT

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:31 AM

Oct 2015

I opt out of anything to do with guns or I/P. Those two topics are too flammable for me.

Maybe you can read the posts first, and then decide if you want out.

I think we need jurors like you rather than people who are biased for one candidate or the other.

Blue_In_AK

(46,436 posts)

7. I serve whenever asked, even in GDP, but

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:54 AM

Oct 2015

I usually try not to hide posts unless they're just way, way over the top. Obviously, a lot of those threads get really heated, and insults are being thrown from all sides. People who post in GDP know what they're in for, so I would assume they have developed fairly thick skin by now. I always explain my reasoning, whether I vote to keep or hide. I think it's only fair to the alerted and to the alerter.

As for myself, when I make a comment and the replies get too heated, I just bow out. It's not worth it to me to get alerted on or to get into some long, drawn-out argument that no one will ever win. Arguing is a pointless exercise because no one's mind is ever changed.

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)

8. Some posters should be alerting on themselves

Reply to tavernier (Original post)

Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:26 AM

Oct 2015

Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee. -Steven Leser, 2008

The manufactured outrage that purports to be legitimate criticism of Hillary is pathetic
Speaking fees? Her charity received donations from folks whose checks were drawn froma massive bank that had issues in a totally different area. This is supposed to be why we ought to be "concerned" about Hillary's impending candidacy?!

If that's all her detractors have got, I'm more confident than ever that she is the right candidate. -Steven Leser, 2015

Reply to this discussion