Official Admin Question Thread!

The admins have been concerned that as the website gets bigger and bigger, we have become much busier with the day-to-day minutiae of running the site, and much less accessible and open to our members. We have really been making an effort over the last couple months to try to be more responsive to members' concerns, but I think we still have quite a way to go. We consider ourselves blessed to have the opportunity to administrate this great community, but it can often be quite difficult to balance the competing interests and concerns of such a diverse membership.

We thought it might be good if we occasionally left the protected confines of the Ask the Admins forum and the private Moderators-Only forum, and opened up an Admin Question Thread on one of the main forums. So, here it is. If you have any questions for the admins, or if there are any issues you would like to discuss, about DU or about the admins, or about almost anything, here is your chance.

We hope that you will all take advantage of this opportunity in spirit which it is intended. Please don't try to start flame wars in this thread. Wherever possible, we will do our best to address your concerns accurately and respectfully.

Unfortunately, my time is somewhat limited, and I do have some other work I need to get done today. When that time comes I'll have to lock this thread so I can go focus on other stuff.

So, what's on your mind?

David Allen
(Skinner)
DU Administrator

On Edit: THANKS!!!! :yourock:

We've been really spending most of our time working on Campaign Underground, so I haven't been able to focus on the gallery. I've got a bunch of new pictures of people that I need to add first, and after that I'll hopefully have some time to do the pets gallery.

I think I speak for all of us at DU who appreciate all yours and all the other admins' hard work!

I would like to air one issue, however. I've increasingly gotten the feeling that the DU admins delete posts with a certain level of discretion that has become tantamount to an editorial statement. Granted, this may be due to the fact that many admins probably have different standards of what is offensive and what is not. However, perhaps this also means that the guidelines need to be clarified, as I have seen many instances where bigotry and ignorance are not tolerated on one side of an issue, yet are on the other side, and that is not right.

That is the ideal which we strive for. However, being that essentially we are in the business of censoring certain speech, it is inevitable that some inconsistency will occur. The sheer volume of posts make consistent rule application impossible. Since our approach is to let people post and then censor later if we are aware of the post, there will inevitably be many, many times when one thing gets deleted and a similar post does not, or one thing stays on the board for one minute, and a similar post stays for twelve hours. Heck, sometimes something will be a blatant rule violation and it won't get removed at all.

This problem is compounded by the fact that there are many members, on many sides of many issues, who believe that their viewpoint is not being treated fairly. When you begin with a certain belief, it is very difficult to avoid seeing things that reinforce that belief. Using the anecdotal evidence which is freely available on the message board, it would be quite simple to make the case that we are biased against any particular viewpoint. I am not saying that there is a nefarious plot to unfairly label us as baised. In fact, I believe that people on all sides of many issues are totally sincere in their belief that they are not being treated fairly. That's human. And once you start to get a certain impression, then it is totally normal to notice things that reinforce that impression.

Another thing we do which plays into these impressions is that we try very hard to give people the benefit of the doubt in cases where their comments and intent are unclear. What may seem obvious to one person may not be totally clear to another -- or to the moderators and administrators who have to decide whether or not something needs to be removed.

We do our best to provide guidelines, and in some places (the Israel/Palestine forum, for example) they can be quite detailed. But no matter how hard we try, there will always be grey areas and misunderstandings.

Finally, it is clear that we all have our biases, and those biases will influence enforcement to some degree. I do not expect the moderators to be perfect, but I do expect them to make every effort to rise above their own biases and to enforce the rules fairly. When they are unsure, they are expected to get a second opinion. And, yes, moderators frequently make mistakes. If a moderator does so, I hope that members will do their best to explain privately why they believe that the moderator made a mistake. But too often members think the best approach is to simply hurl invective at the mods or at me, and that is a sure-fire way for us to ignore your complaints. Ideally, we'd be able to rise above our petty hurt feelings, but we are human too.

Keep in mind, also, that unlike moderators, members are not expected to try to rise above their own biases. In fact, they are generally expected to do the opposite: Become a strong partisan for a particular point of view. I think that members need to sometimes think a little about the fact that their own biases may be influencing the way they see things.

We know that DU is not perfect. And we know that we do let people get away with stuff that could be considered bigoted or disruptive. The best advice I can give you is to try to keep an open mind to other points of view, and also do your best to respectfully educate others (including the admins) when you feel that you are not being treated fairly. I can't promise that I will agree with you. But if you approach me respectfully I will do my best to understand your point of view.

I appreciate your comments and fully understand the situation you're in. All I have asked is for a little more consistency, and I am confident that you do and will continue to strive toward that goal. Thank you again for all your hard work.

As I said, we are trying. We are not perfect, but we do strive to be fair.

to handle all the threads that are clearly trying to tar Kerry as much as possible? Will we (can we?, should we?) have a GD - General Elections forum?

What happens to threads that are honest concerns about Kerry's positions that get turned into flames because some posters insinuate that others are playing for the other team? I'm not talking about personal attacks, but rather things that are just barely outside 'personal attack.'

I suppose we are both asking for a line thats not easily defined....

There are clearly some people on this message board who see malicious intent whenever someone says something to question John Kerry. These people will hurl invective and yell freeper and personally attack because they feel that they are justified in doing so. Let me be clear: This behavior is not permitted. And often, the poor person who gets attacked isn't a freeper at all. They're just a person with an honest concern.

So keep hitting alert on these posts I assume? :hi:

'tis true the DNC site has become a John Kerry site. But factually, some states have yet to hold their primaries.

Nevertheless, some (not all) posts questioning Kerry give me vibes of disruption as well ...

Kucinich still has a link on our homepage, along with John Kerry. But I think it is also clear that, barring an Act Of God, John Kerry is going to be the Democratic nominee.

We have always said that thoughtful, constructive criticism of the nominee will always be permitted on DU. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to draw the line between thoughtful and malicious.

Our current approach is to give people the benefit of the doubt. Unless someone gives us a reason to believe that their intentions are to disrupt, we will permit them to voice their concerns. In practice, enforcement generally works like this:

If someone is namecalling against Kerry, we'll send them a private message or a warning telling them to stop.

If someone is trying to get people to vote for a candidate other than Kerry, or not vote at all, or to bolt the party for some reason, we would tell them to stop.

But if someone posts something negative about John Kerry -- whether it's a news story or a concern or whatever -- we would generally assume that their intentions are honorable and leave them alone. If, however, it seems that a particular person is repeatedly posting negative stuff, we would start to wonder about their motives.

We believe that it is important to allow criticism of the nominee for a few reasons:

First of all, we are a diverse community, and some people actually do have legitimate concerns.

Second, I think it is important for members to not have "rose-colored glasses" about the nominee. We are all adults here, and we can handle hearing honest assessements about our candidate. Sometimes, it is important to know what the problem is if it is to be fixed. Who knows, maybe the Kerry campaign reads DU to get a read on how the base is feeling about the candidate. I would like them to be able to get the honest truth.

Third, I believe it is important that members know that they are permitted to be honest with their feelings on DU. If people feel that they could get banned for simply saying something slightly wrong, that would send a chilling effect on all the discussions. And DU would quickly become a very boring place.

If you don't want to read threads knocking kerry, I suggest you take advantage of the "hide thread" function by clicking the small "x" next to the thread you don't want to see. Or you could ignore individuals who you find particularly irritating.

a few weeks ago: The purpose of a negative campaign is not to convince someone to vote for your candidate - it's to get your opponent's supporters to stay home.

We all see that this is Bush's current campaign strategy. And because this is the premier progressive discussion board, it is, of course, the prime target for a "As a lifelong Democrat, I was going to support Kerry, but now.." type campaign.

Unfortunately, I think that's the cost of having an open discussion board. There are going to be some people who take advantage of the fact that we are open to a broad range of people.

We do our best to sniff them out, but if someone is clever enough, they will be able to avoid detection. I just take comfort knowing that if someone is really doing this, it's a complete waste of their time, because nobody here is going to vote for shrub.

and not vote for Kerry? Again that is the point of a negative campaign.

I'm afraid that at some point, a stricter policy, much like the 2002 election policy, will become necessary. But let's hope I'm wrong for now.

Unfortunately, this just isn't an easy thing to regulate. If someone makes their intentions clear, then we'll do something about it. But I don't think we serve DU or its members if we require people to love John Kerry and think he's always doing the right thing. In fact, I think it would make this place pretty boring. Part of what makes this place so addictive is that it can be so darn irritating sometimes. :)

Do I really threaten Kerry's chances if I share my view that I'm not 100% convinced to vote for Kerry yet? Don't Kerry supporters benefit from hearing the concerns and reservations of independent progressives who are not yet sold on Kerry?

On another note, what are DU's expectations for the debate following Kerry's VP announcement? If he nominates a deal-killer for this voter, does DU want to hear it?

You are free to say so, and you are encouraged to explain why. And when people try to convince you otherwise, I hope that you will listen to what they have to say.

But we expect that you will not use DU in order to convince others to withhold their support from the Democratic ticket.

and clear distinction.

It gets much more complicated once we have to actually enforce it. But we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

Back when I started all the tort reform and insurance reform threads, I spotted people who clearly were paid industry specialists. Over a course of alerts, I did make my case and eventually they were gone. Up until that point I did debate them and rebut them ( in anticipation that you will suggest that that is what we should do) but these people ARE paid for their persistence...so of course, they keep coming back.

I simply want to make DU admin aware of this - it was posted by another DU'er in another thread but I have known of other groups that do this:

New Media Communications conceptualizes, builds, and implements INternet strategies & solutions.

Our political practice group consults for Republican party campaigns and party organizations in the United States and center and center-right parties around the world, continuing to pioneer new initiatives online

An online marketing campaign employs several tactics simultaneously. Our Online Services Department develops and implements online marketing programs using:

Advertising - Online branding, banner ad creation, placement & analysis, strategic link placement, channel advertising, directory placement

Promotional Marketing - Electronic Direct Marketing (EDM), direct opt-in e-mail and viral communications, search engine submission, bulletin board posting, newsgroup and chat room posting, guerilla marketing, permission marketing, online newsletters

-snip-


http://www.technomania.com/onlinemarketing.asp

It's also a fact of life. And unless we know with a reasonable level of certainty that they are paid operatives, it is our belief that they should be given the benefit of the doubt.

If anyone has suspicions about anyone else, please hit alert and let the mods know about it. Be as specific as possible so we can understand why you feel the way you do.

I did make my case on the two that I did find and frankly, it was a great opportunity to debunk their strategy and talking points which thereby negated their strategy....as a result there are now about 100 DU'ers that could debunk any tort reform thread that appears.

I simply wanted it out here so that others would know it exists and know that once admin IS relatively certain and the case has been made, they WILL act.

Thanks.

I am very glad to know that you won't tolerate people trying to get others to vote for someone besides Kerry, or not to vote at all.

Personally, I think there's a lot of negativity and outright Kerry-bashing under the protection of the words "progressives" and "shared goals" from the Message Board Rules.

If nothing else, it breeds further negativity and disaffection and thus hurts the work toward our goals, and it may even move votes from the Democratic candidate to an opponent. Frankly, if Bush supporters are not welcome here, I don't know why Nader supporters are. So I'm glad to see that addressed.

We are doing our best to address the issue in the fairest, most understanding manner possible.

from the moderator point of view? (Since both are Democratic opponents.)

Bush supporters tend to be conservative, and Nader supporters tend to be liberal.

I believe that since Nader supporters are liberal, they are a natural fit to vote Democrat. That is why we have given them greater leeway on this message board.

But we will not give them unlimited leeway. The admins of this board are committed to supporting John Kerry, and it is clear that Ralph Nader is competing with us for the same votes. We do not wish for our website to be used to advance Ralph Nader's candidacy.

if one posts an article or criticism of Kerry that the person must be hounded from post to post. Even when the poster posts positives articles the stalkers continue to disrupt the thread. Yet other post which are critical of Kerry get no notice of these "stalkers.

By stalkers I mean folks who continually misinterpret a posters post and distract the thread with strawman arguments designed just to disprut the posters original intent. Some posters on this board are targets of these same folks consistentl.

I will respond to your question below.

for your reply. :-)'s

:)

Do you have any fave local candidates? Not necessarily just local to you (DC doesn't have too many interesting, contested local races, I imagine), but smaller races across the nation?

DTH

I have not been paying close attention to any races other than the presidential.

We are almost finished with phase one of our Campaign Underground project, which will hopefully give people a way to pay closer attention to local races. And we recently opened up the state forums to give members an incentive to get more interested in local politics.

But sadly, I've not had a chance to give much of my own attention to any local races. At least not yet.

i have been on about a month maybe a little longer. it has brought sanity back to me. i come in daily and spend a lot of time here, (though i have been promising self i am going to walk into life soon, grin)

i do not have a single suggestion or complaint. i think this board is run beautifully

and thank you for providing this space

I think for those of us who have been here a long time, we forget how much of a godsend this place is when you first find it. We long-termers get all caught up in the different factions and the personality conflicts and the disagreement. It is good for new people to remind us of what it was like to find DU for the first time. Despite all of our problems, this place really is an oasis of sanity in a country that has gone completely mad.

I only have one issue with DU Admin. I think the mods in the "Latest Breaking News" forum are just a little bit to agressive in deleting / locking dupes. Some news items that have moved off the radar and may be days old still seem to be considered active and duplicate posts are denied. This has happened to me this week on a post I did on Monday. It was considered a dupe to a post from Saturday and was locked. I added to this old thread, but no other activity was happening there, so I think it was useless to do so. I do look before I post to see if I can add to someone else's thread, but how far back should I go?

Thanks for asking.

because there is a thread in GD.

I've been wondering if we need to once-and-for-all permit duplicate posts in different forums. I will discuss this with the mods and we'll make a decision.

This comes up a lot in the Ask the Admins forum. Generally, the LBN moderators will lock threads about the same news event. But I agree with you that there should be a clearer standard regarding what deserves a new thread and what should be considered a duplicate. At the very least I think that news stories that occur more than 24 hours later should probably be permitted. I will discuss this with the Admins and LBN mods to see if we can come up with a clearer standard.

I've certainly made duplicate posts inadvertently. It's easy to do. (I alert my own dupes if I notice it.)
OTOH *some* members seem to be thread starters ONLY, and SEEM to willfully disregard open threads. They don't always get locked. It's hard to be fair and consistent, I can imagine. But I lose a lot of respect for members who are only interested in what they have to post, and don't care enough about the community to practice team play. :(
/rant

It is very frustrating. If it happens enough, we will step in and give the person a gentle nudge to please look for duplicates before they post.

How shall I seek my revenge? ;)

You would do this now when I haven't one single issue I want/need addressed...So I might as well just take the opportunity to suck up and say :yourock:

:D

Sure he's been, um, altered, but it's him!

All I know how to do is spoil my dog. :)

I think I sent my pic in and it still hasn't shown up(yep just checked). Since I am not getting any feedback on the various emails I sent I was wondering if they got through and if there was just regular intervals of updates and I missed the last boat or something.

When I get a couple hours, I add all the new photos. I suspect the new ones will be added later this week.

Just want to throw my .02 behind DU policy to maintain this as a freeper free zone.

For those with a taste to *discuss* with those types, there are plenty of other options. And best of luck to those who choose to do so. I'm way too old to derive any benefit or pleasure from chitchatting with foul mouthed, robotic, freepoids.

For so long. We all know of at least 2-3 that have thousands of posts and they aren't just "centrist Dems." They more often than not defend Republicans and this administration. I thought that was against the rules. :shrug:

We do not knowingly allow any of them to stay. But clearly there are going to be a few clever ones who get away with pretending to be Democrats for a long time. That's just a fact of life. When we establish conclusively that someone is a freeper, we give them the boot. But since we're liberals, we believe it is appropriate to run this message board on the innocent-until-proven-guilty model.

If you know that someone is a freeper, hit alert and let us know. I promise that if you make a compelling case we'll ban that person. But I also promise that we won't ban anyone without first looking at their entire contribution to the board and getting a complete picture of the person. Often, there are people who some folks consider freeps who are actually good dems. Many people who were once under a shadow of suspicion are now beloved members of the board.

Or at least ask them to somehow prove some level of belief in liberal views in a private message? If not, why not?

Because they would likely just say "yes, I'm a Democrat" and that really doesn't help us one bit.

We occasionally discuss the possibility of having an open forum, but we always reject the idea. If people want to argue with freepers, they can do so elsewhere.

What would you do for a Klondike bar?

I dunno. Maybe I'd quack like a duck.

QUACK, QUACK.

Fans of Family Guy will get that. :)

I meant to say that I would quack like a duck or kill a man.

when will the "Toast ver 2.0" be installed?

:)

Is your toaster configured to accept cookies? If so, remove the cookies immediately and replace them with bread.

Make sure to update your toaster's drivers to the latest version.

Finally, do not attempt to burn your toast to a CD.

Toaster drivers wre updated...but the cookie thing...doh!

Us gals just gotta know! :evilgrin:

if EarlG doesn't chime in that at least one of you guys goes commando I'm gonna be SO disappointed. ;)

Just kidding. Boxers.

Exciting huh?

there for a second. ;)

:D

if one posts an article or criticism of Kerry that the person must be hounded from post to post. Even when the poster posts positives articles the stalkers continue to disrupt the thread. Yet other post which are critical of Kerry get no notice of these "stalkers.

By stalkers I mean folks who continually misinterpret a posters post and distract the thread with strawman arguments designed just to disprut the posters original intent. And only seem to stalk certain posters here.

If you think someone is doing this, then please hit alert to let us know. Provide as much detail as possible so we can understand why you feel you are being stalked.

Unfortunately, often "stalking" is often quite difficult to prove, unless the member is specifically making the disagreement personal. Often when we look at cases of alleged stalking, it just appears that the person has a particular interest in a particular topic, and they tend to respond to those threads.

I might suggest that if you are going to post things that are critical of Kerry, you should make an effort to provide some context. I know people don't feel like they should have to say "I'm voting for Kerry, but" but you might find that it will make people much more receptive to your post, and will increase the likelihood that there is a real discussion rather than flaming. I'm not saying that you are required to do this, nor am I approving of the behavior you describe. I just think that when you are giving people news they don't want to hear, it might help. It's just a suggestion.

I just wish to express my appreciation for all that you, Elad and Earl G. do around here. I admire your coolness under fire, and your evenhandedness in difficult situations.

Just a big thank you is all:toast:

And thank you for the kind message.

I personally do not consider it shameful. We all make mistakes sometimes. The rules are not totally clear in all cases. Stuff happens.

But I would hope that getting a post deleted would make a member reflect on what they have done, and if necessary make more of an effort to be a productive member of our community.

It is shameful for some people to repeatedly treat other members in a rude, disrespectful, and disruptive fashion. It's been my experience that the people who get a lot of posts deleted tend to be people who quite often treat other members poorly.

I think there should be a forum for discussions on improving the party and its policies . Sometimes I lose faith that the party is really moving towards a better country and a better world and I know there are brilliant folks here with great ideas.

The Pukes have pushed the national debate to the right and we're so desperate to get * out of office that we seem willing to let things move to the conservative direction.

I'm home sick today so I'm rambling, sorry

People should feel free to discuss it anywhere that it is appropriate. I don't think we need to have a specific forum for this topic. Particularly because not all members of DU believe that the party needs to move left.

Great job guys. We all owe you a HUGE debt of gratitude!

:toast:

And thanks. :thumbsup:

Who really really secretly "runs" DU...me and slinkerwink or Will Pitt and ZombyWoof?

This is important - I've got money riding on it. And enquiring minds wanta know. ;)

Seriously though, I gotta echo dolo_amber, you just had to do this on a day when I don't have anything important to ask about. :)

You, slinkerwink, WillPitt, and ZombyWoof are all chat-bots intended to distract attention from the REAL people who run DU, who are...

Just kidding.

I know you were just being funny, but I would like to say something here, because I have heard some of the rumors. Here is who really runs DU:

My name is David Allen. I am the sole owner of Democratic Underground, LLC, which makes me the sole owner of the Democratic Underground website. When we launched DU in January of 2001, it was run by me and EarlG, who is a citizen of the UK and goes by the name Dave Allsopp in the real world. A few months after our lauch, Elad came on as a volunteer programmer. He was a regular member of DU before he started giving us free programming services. In the real world, his name is Brian Leitner, and he lives in Illinois.

For the first two and a half years of our existence, DU took up a great deal of my time, but was not my primary source of income. My "real job" was as a freelance web designer. EarlG was my employee in that business. There were many months when we had no web design work because I spent all my time working on DU. There were many, many months when I would not take a paycheck because I did not have the money to do so. I did always find a way to pay EarlG's paycheck. In other words, I have made great personal financial sacrifices to keep this website going, which total well into the tens of thousands of dollars. I did that because I believe in DU and I wanted it to succeed. I knew that someday it would be self-sufficient.

Thankfully, the amount of income from DU steadily increased, and it became self-sufficient during our fourth quarter 2004 fund drive. All three admins are now full-time employees of Democratic Underground. Our monthly expenses total somewhere in the neighborhood of $13,000, including our three salaries. We have never been offered, nor have we ever accepted, one penny from any organization. Our single largest donation ever -- $2000 -- came from a generous member of DU, and had absolutely no strings attached. Our second largest donation -- $1000 -- came from another generous member of DU, and also had absolutely no strings attached. Other than those two donations, we have never received any single donation in the thousand-dollar range. We are funded almost entirely by small donations from the people who come to our website. The shortfall each month is made up of approximately $2500 in merchandise sales and advertising revenue.

When I was a freelance web designer, I did do contract work work for a number of organizations on the left-side of the political spectrum, both directly or indirectly as a subcontractor for other consultants. Those organizations include a broad spectrum of interests including the DLC, People for the American Way, pro-choice groups, environmental groups, organized labor, political candidates and others. None of those organizations had ANY IDEA that Democratic Underground even existed, or that I was the person who owned it and ran it. Some current and former DU members have tried to smear me with a whisper campaign based on the fact that I have done work for the DLC in the past, and suggesting that they were covertly funding DU. This is ridiculous. If the DLC were funding DU, they would clearly not be getting their money's worth. Just look objectively at the content of this website and the posts on this website if you need any proof. I got work from the DLC because someone over there happened to see a flyer that I had hung on a telephone pole here in Wasington, DC. There is exactly one person at the DLC who knows that I run DU. He is not in any position to covertly fund anything, and furthermore has told me that he thinks most of the people here are nuts.

DU is totally independent. Any decisions made about running this place are my own, as are any errors, which are many. Everything I have ever done, I did because I felt at the time it was the right thing for DU. I have not always done the right thing, but I have always had the best intentions. And I can live with the consequenses of my mistakes. I just wish that people would blame me personally, rather than trying to claim some sort of nefarious conspiracy.

over at "the site that shall not be named". Closest I've ever come to posting there. I thought it was pretty silly. As a far leftist I can understand their desire to move the party left. But I'm also quite proud of the Democratic party's committment to being a big tent and taking in lots of varying viewpoints from the center and left.

Frankly, I wouldn't care if you were so deep in the pockets of the DLC that you couldn't find your way out with a flashlight and compass. (Not to mention it would amuse the hell out of me if they were actually funding a site where they get shit on so much as they do here.) :evilgrin: It's your right to fall wherever on the political compass you choose.

I don't think some people think these things through logically. But congratulations...the fact that you have a conspiracy theory surrounding you is evidence that you have arrived. ;)

I suppose that is one way of looking at it. Maybe we have arrived.

It is my hope any and all rumors about DU's ownership to the contrary are in jest, and if not, I am in for a hell of an audit.

Safer to say DU has owned me these past 2 1/2 years I have been on, as I struggled successfully to find new work, and have met the greatest people through here, especially the incredibly brilliant and lovely KadeCarrion - who changed my life.

Skinner, you really do need to know that DU has made differences in people's lives that transcend politics, and yet, it has never lost sight of your objective, nor is it diluted just because this site does affect many of us personally. The sacrifices you made are greatly appreciated.

And hey, free tax advice for the asking anytime!

Sometimes this place can be quite frustrating. But most people here are really great, and people often tell me how much this place means to them. It touches me greatly.

Hopefully this will put to rest some of the more stupid bullshit I've seen flung around the Internet. (But I doubt it.)

DTH

I doubt it will put much of anything to rest. But at least now our side of the story is available -- whether or not people wish to believe it.

Is that like, *Earl Grey*...like tea...cos he's like y'know, British? :7

And btw EG... Chris Morris? Ever heard of? Any opinion? :hi:

As for Chris Morris, one word: genius.

in case you didn't know, and supposing also that you care...

"The Day Today" was released on DVD last week. :bounce: :D

http://www.sendit.com/video/item/7000000087033

Cool. I have it all on video, but DVD would be nice. I guess I'll have to find a Region 1 version though. I see Brasseye is available on DVD now too.

:evilgrin:

often enough that we did. *snort* But apparently we lost control sometime last week in a power struggle with Will. Who knew? :shrug:

Sorry. I forgot to tell you.

I'm sure it varies by forum but the commitment of volunteers here is enormous. Thought it would be good for this community to think about the time commitment that the mods make on our behalf. :hi:

Some mods are online for many, many hours a day -- like 12 or more. But other mods only stop by for an hour or two. We do not have a strict time committment. Instead we try to choose mods who would be coming to DU anyway because they like spending time here, and then assign them so we've got fairly consistent coverage.

ON EDIT: Yes, the mods are making a tremendous commitment to DU, which is many hours each week. I am eternally grateful for their help. Without them, I'd be totally screwed. They do great work, and they always strive to be fair.

Mods: :loveya:

This forum rocks. Very easy to use, great design, fast-loading pages and a fantastic community of progressive like-minds (as like as you can get on the left). You guys do a GREAT job of banning the disruptors and that's an incredible accomplishment. I can't tell you how many times I've had to ignore some posters for weeks on other boards until they are finally outed and banned.

We really appreciate it. :)

And...am I still the funniest, most precious drunk on DU?

(Naturally, the obvious answer is YES to both of those...but, I thought I would stop in and say "hi.")

Stephanie

Perhaps NSMA would like to respond. :shrug:

:)

No matter how big He makes His boulder, He could lift it.

Blasphemer!!!

God can create a boulder of infinite size, and he can then lift it.

an infinite supply of Ben-Gay to rub on his back afterwards.

I've seen a couple get banned, but I've also seen several just get the threads locked without a banning, so it's obvious that mods are reading the threads and alerts. I'm all for giving the benefit of the doubt, but geez louise.

Clearly, if someone is a torture apologist, we would consider that a big red flag that strongly suggests a political orientation that is not progressive. If you think we missed someone, please hit alert and let us know so we can take a closer look at their record.

There are several posters that create posts of such exceptional quality and interest, that I'd like to somehow be flagged to their new material.

The search function is available, I realize...but might it be possible (and practical) to modify the "buddy" designation such that posts (and or threads) by individuals on the buddy list were somehow flagged or highlighted?

I know you carry a lot of work - in fact, after reading how much you do for such modest compensation, I'm almost embarrassed to ask about the foregoing - so of course I would understand if you slapped your forehead and told me to hush! :)

Unfortunately, I doubt we would do it. We have to weigh the potential benefit of each idea against the potential it has to bog down our servers. I will ask elad about this, but my guess is that it will add another layer of work to the servers that might outweigh the benefit.

If it's possible, this really would be a good feature... (bowing to your already superior webmaster abilities). :)

I think the Spurs will spank the Lakers in 5 or 6, and go on to the Conference Finals. The Minnesota/Sacramento series is going to be intense, and honestly I can't pick a winner. I think that when Sacramento is on, they're ON, and easily the best team in the league. But they can't seem to be consistent with that. On the other hand, they appear to be on an upswing, so if I were Minnesota, I'd be worried.

But, Minnesota is fantastic this year. I think they need more out of Sprewell if they're going to beat the Kings. KG and Cassell will show up, but if Sprewell doesn't have good games, they'll lose.

I think both Sac and Minnesota can beat the Spurs in the Conference finals, but if for some crazy reason (*cough* REFS *cough hack cough*) the Lakers win against SA, I'd rather see Sacramento play them in the conf. finals because I think Minnesota would be too intimidated, while Sac knows they can beat them and has a bloodlust for it. Sac would win that series.

However, the Spurs go on to the conf. finals, I have no favorite in the west - it's 100% up for grabs. The Spurs, Kings and Timberwolves all have what it takes to win, any of them could do it.

Accourse, Indiana is as good as any team in the west, and Detroit as well. So unlike past years, winning the western conference doesn't mean you win the title, so whoever does end up winning the west is going to have their hands full.

holding up the democraticunderground.com banner for the television cameras?

It was very cold and wet. But it sure was worth it.

It used to be pinned in the Lounge, but I can't find it now.

If you can remember the word "gallery" then you can remember the URL for the gallery:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/gallery

Especially, but not exclusively towards sex threads.

Now, the reason we established that rule, correct me if I'm mistaken, was because the Lounge had deteriorated into a locker room. There were large numbers of threads blatantly discussing sexual practices, such as "have you ever had a threesome," etc.

I have no problem with these getting removed, especially since some people seemed to be getting some sort of bizarre kick out of them. So ban sex threads, I agree.

The problem, I think, comes with seperating the rule of the law from the spirit of the law, so to speak. Certain things are banned because, in some round about way, they involved sex.

For instance, there was once a thread entitled, "My 12" boner," which was about the posters new 12" boning knife, complete with a picture. This thread was locked as a sex thread. Now in my opinion, that's just plain silly. And the Lounge is supposed to be silly. And if I may say so, it seems to convey a real lack of sense of humor. A little sexual innuendo doesn't make something into the "sex threads" which got this rule started in the first place.

And then there's consistency. "My 12" boner" was locked where as my threads "hot french seamen," and "regarding Cleveland steamers" were not.

:smoke:

Sometimes, I think things do get shut down that might not have to be. I do not think we need to be overly sensitive.

But on the other hand, in the specific cases you mention I kinda think that they should have all been shut down. People don't come to DU so they can see threads with titles like "My 12" Boner" "hot french seamen" and "regarding Cleveland steamers". I know it's a joke, but I think many people would prefer not to have the mental image of boners, semen, or feces when they come to DU. There is a point where this sort of thing starts to detract from our core purpose. And there is also a point where people begin to feel like this might not be the place for them.

It may be possible for us to write clear guidelines regarding what sex talk is appropriate and what is not, but I'm fairly skeptical. This is really more of a "I know it when I see it" kinda thing.

I right a post about lack of sense of humor, and then you go and take it all seriously.

:evilgrin:

I think this job probably makes me seem like a joyless scold. I think it comes with the territory.

Thanks for the RSS feed. It is tremendous and I wouldn't be surprised to see it popping up on the web. Thank you for all that you do. This website is a place to cut through the bullshit and get to the real information. The enviro/science forum is actually one of the best on the web. There are some brilliant people that hang out in there. The economic forum is no slouch. This place attracts some of the best.

Of course, who can rave about DU without talking about the Lounge? The Yaks, thongs and bad disaster movie threads are very entertaining.

We have accomplished some pretty cool things as a community. One of the most outstanding was the senate vote count on the gay marriage amendment. We got the information first and it was linked to by many other sites.

There are two requests that I would like to make. First, go to the old ATA format. That was a good forum. Second, and I have asked before; add a technology forum. I know we aren't slashdot, but there are still many technology related issues that can be talked about.

Thanks a lot, Bleachers7

Regarding the Ask the Admins forum, I'm assuming by "old format" you mean when we just let people flame away in there. I doubt that we would do this. Unfortunately, our time and our mental health would make this very difficult. While I think it was great for people to be able to post whatever they wanted, it became apparent that a few people were using it as a soapbox to berate the admins. These few people were monopolizing my time with extended flamey arguments on the same issues, and -- let's be honest here -- they cared little for what I had to say.

Our original solution was to lock the thread after an admin responds, but clearly that was not a particularly friendly thing for us to do.

I think our current approach makes sense. Let people start threads if they have particular concerns, and engage the admins with follow-up discussion, but don't let others "pile on".

Regarding the technology forum, as you probably know, I am usually quite reluctant to add new forums. I think, perhaps, we should just clearly define a place for discussion of technology issues in one of the existing forums.

I posted it in the General Discussion board becuase I didn't know for sure if I could post it in the breaking news section, I took the pictures a little over 3 hours ago and would like to know if I could post again there for people to see it a little more visibly?

You should not post it again, but you are free to occasionally "kick" your own thread back to the top of the forum as long as the kicking does not get excessive.

I was kind of thinking that myself but wanted to make sure before I did anything.

BTW this site and you guys rock!

I'm glad you like it.

just turned off or are they given a reason why they are being banned?

If the person has been here a while, they are often given a final warning before they get banned, which clearly explains what they've been doing to cause trouble. But that is not always the case. Often, we just shut them off.

When they are banned, they get a message which indicates that their posting privileges have been revoked. It also tells them that occasionally we do make mistakes, and if they think their banning was a mistake they should contact us. Few people ever do. Furthermore, we explain that we do occasionally allow members to return after a cooling off period, provided that they make the case for why we should let them back in. A few people do that, and if they seem sincere we will often give them a second chance.

Often, banned people send us hate mail. As a means to get one's account turned back on, that has never worked.

or was it just a crazy idea that sprang up out of nowhere?

Are you all glad you went ahead and put the website together?

We were pissed about the Selection. We wondered "what can we do to help fight these bastards?" and the obvious answer was to start a website (we were, after all, web designers). We had an idea, but I'm generally pretty slow to try new things. I seem to remember that EarlG was pushing it pretty hard. I suspect it wouldn't have happened if he hadn't pushed it.

We are very glad we put the website together. This is an amazing community, and it is a privilege to be a part of it. We have come so far since those humble beginnnings. :)

But we're not looking that far ahead right now. I would love to have an inauguration party. (But I think it would probably be in January. ;))

Thank you in advance. :)

I'm going to update the gallery this week. Your photo will be included in the next update.

:headbang:
rocknation

Try google:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Why+IS+the+concept+of+odd+and+even+a+philosophical+illusion%3F

Unfortunately, I have to go do some work now, so I'm going to lock this thread. But I'm going to pin it to the top of the GD forum so that other members have the opportunity to read it.

The questions were all great, and I appreciated the opportunity to respond. I suspect we'll do more Admin Question Threads again periodically.

If you have any more questions, you are of course welcome to post in the Ask the Admins forum, or you can contact me directly.

Thanks.

Skinner