In view of yesterday's fuck-up, an IMPASSIONED PLEA.

First of all, I must disclaim that all of the following may seem somewhat arrogant to you, coming from a person who has been on this forum for so little time, and may even be seen as ixy asking for a ban... but hear me out.


Yesterday, one of our forum members posted a link to a post on the techievampire.com blog, which was a point-by-point answer to the "A special letter from a New Yorker" posted here on DU a while ago. The person giving the link promised that the post would make us "spit fire," and by god, it didn't disappoint. It was vile and foul, and simply made me shudder in its inhumanity.

But then, what happened?

Dozens of DU'ers, including yours truly, flooded in like sheep, read the post, flew off the fucking handle (understandably enough) and FREEPED that post for all it was worth. Of course, the real FReepers came in afterwards, with kudos and "you go girl's" for having riled those stupid "DUmmies." And you have no idea how painful it was to read those anti-humanists (I'm not calling them conservatives out of respect to my good and intelligent friends Z., C.S., A.J. and others) gloat all over the page with comments like "All the personal attacks that have been waged against her by the DUers doesn't prove their point. In fact it proves that she was right about them." If you want to, then go back to the page, read them and weep. http://www.techievampire.net/wppol/?p=725 Don't know about you, but to me, it was just one notch below hearing Osama Bin Laden give a FUCKING ELECTION ADDRESS to Americans 3 years after 9/11.

One of the FReeper posts congratulated the author with a "smashing success," which evidently means "having managed to trigger a fountaining barrage of bullshit from everyone involved," as if there wasn't enough of that particular compound in our lives.


You might ask, "Well, ixat, if you're so damn smart, what did YOU do when you read that post?" Excellent question.

I followed the link, read a few paragraphs (all I could stomach), and I flamed. I flamed!! My posts were some of the most sedate on the page, but that's not saying much, and the fact remains that I was no better than anyone else in the end.

Come on people! We're not just FReepers who happen to support gay rights! We're Progressives, ferfucksake, with a capital P! We are willing to pay extra and risk our good for the sake of others... How about we, myself included, make the small extra sacrifice of not indulging our immediate urges and swallowing flamebait hook, line and sinker? How about each one of us thinks, "What do I really hope to accomplish with this kneejerk rant? Do I really think this will help my cause, or will it help the people I'm up against, by reassuring them that they're not the only ones who spew vomit and sewage on forum boards?"

I can hear your objections, that they're too far gone, they'll hate us anyway, that they live on a different wavelength from us. But you know what? Right after 9/11, I went around doing the unpopular thing - urging caution, telling people that we cannot lash out blindly, that we have to do this the smart way, that we have to eliminate those who are too far gone, yes, but also make sure that we're not hated so much by those who aren't. The response I invariably got is, "Well, they're going to hate us anyway." Not true! It's obvious to anyone who takes the time to think about it that jerks are hated more than non-jerks. Come on, is our case not strong enough as it is? And isn't that why we are here, because we were drawn not by empty rhetoric, but by cold hard facts?

I don't care how you rein yourself in - finger your lucky charm, bite your tongue, think of the passage in the Bible where Abraham warns Samson not to fall to the wiles of Canaanite women, or make up your own fake Bible reference - but we would do very well to behave with restraint, and that includes every one of us, because a community is only as civil as its most foul-mouthed member. Sure, the DU forums are defined upfront as a no-holds-barred stomping ground for Progressives, and I'm not advocating a change in forum rules here. After all, there should be a place where a Democrat can unwind and preach to the choir, right? However, when it comes to responding to external posts, especially hostile ones, our creed should be "Honor, logic, common sense, and restraint." Can you imagine if, instead of the 100-odd entries of screaming rage, that blog got just one, that read something like this: "Having read your post, we find it offensive to our very sense of humanity. While we entertained the idea of debating you on the issues that you raised, we feel that any debate is pointless in light of the inflammatory rhetoric you chose to employ. We hope that in the future you may find the will to resist such juvenile urges. Signed: DemocraticUnderground." Nice, concise, and mature. Let'em try and gloat about that.

Hardcore FReepers will perhaps remain unmoved, but hardcore FReepers are a rather small segment of the Internet population. Let's face it, we can laugh all we want at our own zingers, but doesn't it smack just a little bit of a circle-jerk? When we post on external sites, we're not a self-contained community anymore, and what are we hoping to prove by giving 100 comments that sound exactly like the thing we deplore, only from the opposite side of the political spectrum? Let's try and not give "them" the chance to say about us, "well, see, they're just as bad! We flamed, and then they flamed!"

I would feel unfulfilled if I didn't make another concrete suggestion. Since DU is all about organizing efforts, how about we create our very own "crack response team," comprised of people who can state the case as clearly and civilly as possible? Mind you that I'm not nominating myself for the group, not having that much confidence in my ability to refrein from cheap shots.


I hope all of this made sense, and I hope that this is the start of a good thing.

Ixat out.

and thank you...it's hard to watch my own tongue sometimes. I don't know about the situation you are referring to (I'll follow the link to see) but you just convicted me of some ways I need to be careful. Thank you.

I really need to watch my msg length, but that was all I could do to say all I wanted to.

And I see a fellow Clark supporter, no less? ;)

...I've been seeing a lot of examples of this kind of thinking today. Skinner's homepage post, one I did today, and several others. I think you're tapping into the vein that many are.

If you look at some of the later posts in the thread you mentioned, you'll see the author of the thread actually calmed down and started to see the humor in the whole situation. That's a good sign.

I think it's time for some unity here, folks. We must not let them divide and conquer. We can start by not demonizing each other for disagreeing. The freepers will come and try to stir things up. Let us remain calm.

Yes, it was a moving letter, but in its own way it generalized and wrote off many people in "red" states by painting the world in shades of black and white, and its tone was patronizing.

It's both things: it was a letter worth writing and worth reading on its own merit, but I'm not sure it was as effective as the author would have liked.

For the record I do disagree with Miss Vampire or whatever her name is -- she is by far the worse.

The single biggest problem (and you Freepers take note) with having any kind of a dialogue with Freepers and their ilk is that they cannot ever be anything but snide and condescending, not matter how many opportunities for constructive dialogue exist.

Then again, if they were able to be reasonable and constructive it's unlikely that they would be Freepers, but I like to think that Miss Vampire maybe actually has half a brain and could have responded with more maturity.

And BTW I don't think that every response on that website came from DU either.

I didn't have anything to do with this debacle, having passed by the original post, so I'm somewhat removed from all this. But we're Democrats, fer Chrissake. Who's gonna coordinate any responses from the likes of us? It's not herding cats. It's predicting Brownian motion.

all I can say, disseminate... I don't see a way to coordinate everyone on a website of this size, and why would we even want to. Just maybe we can work on calming down our fellow DU'ers, so that fewer of them jump at this kind of bait.

and couldn't even finish reading it...

what assholes!

thats about all i can say

While I wasn't one of those who responded to her thread, I did read it, and was as pissed off as she intended for me to be.

However, to all those who did respond to her, no matter how badly they felt they had to flame her, I must say, good work! :thumbsup:

Sorry, but some Dems are just sick to death of people like her, and have decided they're not going to take it anymore. I don't blame them even a little bit.

My natural reaction to people like her is to get nauseous, and then block her (and her ilk) out of my brain, but there are plenty of people who find it infinitely cathartic to rant right back at people like her. Good for them!

So, while I may not find the enjoyment in engaging in flame wars, I'm completely behind those who have had enough, and feel compelled to say so.
If reading the shit she was spewing didn't convince you that 'taking the high road' is useless, then I don't know what will.

-chef-

I just read it for the first time because you drew my attention to it.
As I expected, 'twas a piece of shit written by a bigger piece of shit.
I can easily see why people didn't feel like playing nice-nice with the freeper bitch.

Noble bid, but as you probably know, turning the unslapped cheek has gotten us nowhere since 33 AD or so.
We're about ready to throw the right off.
They're not worth the cost of upkeep.

There's argument that the reference in the Bible of "turning the other cheek" has not been understood properly by the majority of us. To be slapped and then turn the other cheek to that person wasn't necessarily an act of defeat or of allowing oneself to be beaten more or whatever. Some Bible scholars say that given the culture of the time, that was the most offensive thing you could do- it was like saying the first slap didn't hurt you at all. Of course, as with everything, the meaning of this is debated. My point though is that the strongest argument or comeback or whatever always will come from the thought and meaning behind what is said or done. Vulgarities, while they may be fun or useful for venting (I tend to like them for that), will only incite more vulgarities. Just my thoughts.

but will still claim it's futility

I've stubbed a toe or hammered a thumb all by my lonesome as well as with women and children around, so I've tried both ways.
A good foxy cussin' eases a lot of pain, whereas "Doggone it, that smarts!" only seems to make it worse. :)
In confrontations however I prefer low-key derision.
A good put-down is like placing a carefully applied "Kick Me!" sign on the back of your target.
When the put-down is done properly, all your opponent knows is that suddenly people are sniggering at him/her and he/she hasn't the slightest idea why. :)

and vulgarities do help... I mean, it was the very definition of guilty pleasure, but I really enjoyed the "fuck the south" post ;) We can cuss all we want on DU proper, I was only talking about how we confront people outside of our site.

but when I look at what I ended up doing, I'm somewhat sickened. And the fact that I descended to her level and replied in kind hurts me more than her BS post ever could.

And come on, I never advocated turning the other cheek... Be fair :) All I said that we don't let them drag us down to their level. I have nothing against a good one-liner, and nothing against defending one's own viewpoint either, but a flame war ultimately hurts us more than it hurts them. Try to imagine how it looks from the POV of a dispassionate observer: 2 sides engaged in identical mud-slinging and name-calling, or 1 side spewing BS and the other replying with dispassionate arguments. I mean, we do play to the reality crowd, do we not?

I generally prefer not to give them an audience since that's what they crave.
You figuratively rubbed my face in it today however by addressing your post to the DU at large which made me peek.
I gave you my 2 cents.
She got nothing from me.
Welcome to DU, by the way! :hi:

I resent the fact that I subjected another human being to that. Hats off on not giving her anything, I wish I had held my horses sooner... And thanks for the welcome!!

We don't hurt them. We hurt ourselves.

As far as I'm concerned, his recent videotape WAS 'a fucking election address' - on behalf of, and all but paid for by, the Republican Party. Don't really see how it compares to a bunch of forum addicts letting off steam at a - now, what was the painstakingly-thought-out and devastatingly apposite phrase I came up with earlier? Oh, yeah - stupid, fat bitch.

asshole pulls off the worst act of terror ever, thumbs his nose at the most powerful nation on earth for 3 years, and then taunts us on our national political events for not having caught him.

leads into:

a freeper self-proclaimed bitch writing a blog post, getting all sorts of democrats bent out of shape by her extremist bullshit, who then sits back and laughs as we multiply the insults and send them back to her, feeling good about herself for having dragged us all down to her level.

...but I don't believe that 'taunting' was the intent of OBL's video. From the moment I saw it I considered it to be basically a fairly obvious PR piece for Bush.

And I don't even look good in tinfoil.

actually, the message (of which I read the transcript) was a good piece of advice had it come from anyone other than OBL... Tinfoil hat aside, the guy is a brilliant strategist, and since he must have known that no American would even consider taking him at face value, then by criticizing Bush he knew that he was actually helping the guy.

As for taunting... I regard the very fact of that video as an implicit taunt "hey, America, you haven't got me yet!"

was a major talking point for the Dems.

'Nyahahaha, America, I'm still alive and I'm EVIL, bwahaha, oogy-boogy-boogy, ph34r m3 etc etc' was, I think, a much stronger talking point for the GOP.

and get bent over some more? If they bring hate to the table we bring detestation. If they bring contempt we bring hatred. We match them on every slimey evil they bring forth and then trump them with more. We give no quarter and we do not ever, ever back down again. If your blood is not boiling from what has happened to America you may be in the wrong party.<or state>

If that's the case, we're as bad as they are. NOTHING would be worth lowering myself to their standards. Besides, if flaming (as the right does so often) accomplished anything, our country wouldn't be as divided as it is today. They can't win us over with the way they communicate, and neither will we convince them if we communicate in the same way. Not saying we should compromise what we are communicating, but the manner in which we communicate it.

What you're suggesting is that in order to defeat "them" you have to become "them" and that's not really winning, is it? I could be wrong. I dunno.

goal is accomplished. But hey I understand not really wanting to sacrifice for a good cause. I mean its hard work. Really hard work.

the whole point is that we (and especially we, as the free-thinkers and members of the reality-based community) cannot really win that way. And please don't insinuate that I should change parties, I fail to see how I earned such an unfair invitation.

There are different ways of not backing down and not giving quarter, and not all of them have to do with matching the right word for word and insult for insult. One can refuse to back down by standing steadfastly by one's beliefs, and not being browbeaten into apologizing for them. One can stand fast by being civil yet firm, having done one's homework and having all one's arguments straight. One can score points by making some really good comebacks, and few of the really good zingers are loud ones. One can rise above the fray by carrying oneself with presidential gravitas and schooling the loud yapping dogs as to the meaning of dignity.

All of these things are harder to do than getting into a screaming match with FReep... but then, they are the things that work...

before I discovered what certain people were doing to this country, I used to have a reputation for being extremely diplomatic. When I first started posting, I always addressed each President with a President title - no matter which party.

I am one who has always believed that platitudes and orders are boring and insulting. 'There will always be war' and "get over it'.

The kind of post that sets me off is when new posters say that nothing can be done, nothing will come of it, that something is tinhat - all the scoffing type of messagess. It is scoffing at our words, our feelings, our ideas, our mood, our news, our theories. If we can analyze methods used to bring us down, split us up, scare us off, set us off - we should do it...analyze it and provide the clues - especially the team response. It would be easier to know when we need to go into a refraining mode.

Team response - it is obvious that there are teams. What they do has even more impact.

I'm all for controlling the trolls rather than being controlled by them.

One way to analyze their methods is to start noticing how they do it and post it.

I think the Mission Statement is a great idea - a statement that includes what I get from DU - to aim high. Who wants to crawl into a denial and regression hole when we can soar?

(Hello & welcome to most of you newbies...you aren't the ones we're discussing.)

They immediately warn us off certain topics: The 2000 Election (Move On!), 9/11 (Gosh, who could have known!), Iraq (Too bad Bush got that bad intelligence!), the 2004 Election (It was Moral Values!). Then they inform us that "we" make Democrats look bad with our tin hat, far left, liberal ideas. We'll be marginalized!

And they do use tag teams. (Using the term "circle jerk" will get your post deleted, as I discovered.)

but I hardly displayed any intention of warning you off of topics. In fact, all of those are very sore spots for me, and I have no intention of forgetting them or reconciling myself to them. And, while I bow to your seniority on the forums, I must say that I never implied that your ideas made Democrats look bad - I merely commented on the attitude.

My apologies for the "circle jerk" comment.

although re: " If we can analyze methods used to bring us down, split us up, scare us off, set us off - we should do it...analyze it and provide the clues - especially the team response."

I'll try to be as much help as I can, but I kind of suck at psychology.

no matter what gets posted in either forum. Presumably there are a few reasonable Freepers but nobody ever posts their stuff over here because you can't get a good laugh out of it; similarly, you're not going to see a Freeper pick out a post that's actually well reasoned and persuasive and post it over there. So it doesn't really matter how well behaved you can get 50,000 DUers to be as long as there's still one or two flying off the handle.

My advice is just to stay out of the whole "responding to the crazy RW email" game. You can't waste your whole life trying to reply to every piece of shit that comes out of a right-wing piehole. There's a lot of pieholes over there spewing a lot of shit.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

Hi, how are you?

Sadly, I have to agree on the "it doesn't really matter how well behaved you can get 50,000 DUers to be as long as there's still one or two flying off the handle." However, and perhaps contrary to what I said earlier, numbers do matter. Of course, one person out of 50,000 who can't keep his/her big mouth shut is a fly in the ointment, but I still maintain that we should make the effort. And as for not replying to every piece of crap ever spewed by a right-winger... you're exactly right, and it's exactly what I'd like to see - after all, dozens of our guys did waste time on that stupid post, and just ended up pouring oil on the fire. That's exactly where restraint comes in, in the form of either a stock reply to extremist posts like the one I proposed, or perhaps silence altogether. All in all, it would definitely help DU's public image... or at least, fail to hurt it any further. It just breaks my heart to see DU and FReep mentioned in the same sentence by third parties. There are trolls on all forums, to be sure... but we can at least try.

I don't get it. Why is is this a 'fuck up'?

well, yeah, your post was more or less reasonable, but we really flooded that place with, should I say, more flamboyant ones... those are the ones I referred to. I mean, to be sure, it's probably standard practice and happens all the time, but I'm just a restless little reformer, can't leave well enough alone... especially since so many people who commented here agree with me.