Skip to main content

View Diary: Romney flat-out lying to his own base about abortion (112 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Your understanding of the site's rules is wrong. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gooderservice, poligirl, triv33

    From the FAQs:  

    It is begrudging community practice to respond to an undeserved troll rating by troll rating the ratings abuser, thus reducing their own level of "trustedness" and making them less able to abuse ratings in the future.
    Item 6.

    When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

    by PhilJD on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 08:49:17 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  It's a retaliatory HR (0+ / 0-)

      for HR'ing someone else without an agreement.

      The full quote lends more context:

      Do note give retaliatory troll ratings. If you get what you believe to be an undeserved troll rating, do not retaliate. Leave it to others to decide if the rating was abusive. It is begrudging community practice to respond to an undeserved troll rating by troll rating the ratings abuser, thus reducing their own level of "trustedness" and making them less able to abuse ratings in the future. But don't do it unless you are absolutely positive the original rating was abusive -- and I mean 100% positive. And never do it if you're the one that got troll rated. I repeat: do not troll rate fights that you yourself are in.
      This seems to be a "retaliatory troll rating." Also, why was the original rating abusive? I'm unclear, personally.

      I'm doing my best to help what looks to me like a crappy HR. Feel free to have it double-checked with the moderation here if you feel it's in error. I don't fully claim to even understand the original comment well enough to understand the response. I do see that the HR looks retaliatory, however.

      There's history there. Period.

      And that's all I have to say on this. Again, if I am off-base, I'll remove my uprate gladly. But I really don't believe that I am here. God, especially in the middle of an election when the stakes are high.

      •  so, Shahryar was participating in a diary... (4+ / 0-)

        and Brit came in out of the blue and HRd him twice, on non-HRable comments. he then posts a link to another diary that Brit did not like that Shahryar recced and tipped as his justification for it.

        and Brit did this to Shahryar in 2 different diaries tonight - gave 3 HRs for no really justifiable reason to someone who was participating in a diary.

        and so a few folks uprate against the bad HRs.

        and you have a problem with the upraters and not Brit swooping in out of the blue, throwing what look like either retaliatory or disagreement HRs, in 2 separate diaries? (which incidentally makes it look like Brit was hunting for Shahryar in the first place...)

        Really? so you're ok with anyone swooping in just to HR you out of the blue for a non-reason? good to know MO, good to know...

        A) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12 B) "Stoking the base’s enthusiasm is part of a campaign’s job, whether or not it thinks it should have to do it." ~Michelle Goldberg

        by poligirl on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 10:23:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site