Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Is in Denial About What We Face. (227 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The hides are deserved. And you deserve one too. (2+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Broke And Unemployed, howarddream
    Hidden by:
    FischFry

    Bush stole 2004 the same way the SCOTUS stole 2000.

    If you don't know that, you don't really belong on this board.

    Troll.

    •  Well, if I "deserve" one... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jeff in nyc

      If I "deserve" one for saying a hide was undeserved, then you surely deserve one for the personal attack.

      Read the rules....dick.

      Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

      by FischFry on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:06:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You read the "someone else's house rule" (0+ / 0-)

        If you disagree, that's fine, but no need to troll  and start piefights.

        "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

        by Broke And Unemployed on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:11:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I did neither (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jeff in nyc

          I happen to agree with the commenter's view that the diary is blatant conspiracy-mongering -- but that's neither here nor there. I think he was being unfairly hit with hide ratings. It is not unusual to post a comment explaining that you gave a rec to balance out an undeserved hide rating. I've seen that done hundreds of times. It's not trolling to do that. Nor is it starting a pie fight. Just because two of you responded to my comment by hitting me with hide ratings doesn't mean that I am the one starting a piefight. Look in the mirror.

          Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

          by FischFry on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:27:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The rules for hide ratings (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jeff in nyc
      To Troll Rate something has exactly one meaning. When you Troll Rate something, as a trusted user, you are stating that the comment should be made invisible to all site users. You're saying that the comment is so bad -- so disruptive or damaging to the community -- that it isn't worth even a debate, but should be deleted from the discussion as being simply inflammatory, simply off-topic, or simply a lie. Remember that, because that is the only use of the troll rating. It is an editorial vote to delete a comment from the conversation. Conversely, there is one particular reason troll ratings should never be used: to express disagreement with a poster's opinion.

      Do not troll rate people for expressing a contrary opinion, so long as it is expressed in a civilized fashion.

      It is abusive conduct to give hide ratings because you disagree with the expression of opinion -- even when that opinion is a difference of opinion on whether a hide rating for someone else was deserved.

      There are consequences for your abuse of hide ratings.

      if your definition of obvious and egregious is not the definition used by the rest of the community or by the site administrators, expect your rating ability to be suspended.
      While it is tre that I gave you a hide rating -- it was not for a difference of opinion or even in retaliation for the one you gave me -- which is also prohibited. I gave you one for the unprovoked and totally baseless personal attack.
      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.
      I'm 100% positive. You attacked me personally and called me a troll for simply stating that I didn't think another comment deserved hide ratings -- and, by the way, my original interpretation is correct. It was abusive to give out hide ratings because you were upset with the comment. It was a valid opinion, albeit expressed with excessive vehemence. For what it's worth, some of us agree with Markos' negative view of the type of conspiracy-mongering that the commenter criticized. Perhaps 'un-American" was over the top, but the opinion was worthy...and anyway, you can't give out hides because you disagree.

      Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

      by FischFry on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:23:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh! That's what HR means. (0+ / 0-)

        I really had no idea.  I've minimized posts before because they were too long, so for easy scrollability.  I am not a "trusted user", so it makes no difference, but I didn't know that's what that meat.

    •  Up-Rated for Retaliatory HR. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Broke And Unemployed, bythesea

      I miss Speaker Pelosi :^(

      by howarddream on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:30:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Uh-oh Arendt might HR you for that (0+ / 0-)

        What am I saying? Arendt only HRs comments s/he finds disagreeable.

        Might add that Hannah Arendt was far more open to contrary views.

        Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

        by FischFry on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 08:10:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site