Skip to main content

View Diary: False diary gets 200 recommends: shame on DailyKos (146 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Surprised but not surprised (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dkmich, AntKat, Catrina

    I am not new to sites like these (I ran one during the Clark campaign), but have to admit I'm stunned by the lack of factchecking and the amount of bias I've seen here.

    What particularly gets me is the misuse of the troll rating.  TU's use it to block out comments of anyone they don't agree with.  This is particularly evident with hot-button postings on the Israeli-Palestinian issue (which I made the mistake of wading into).

    What kind of people are on this site anyway?

    I came here to engage in honest discourse.  Now I'm wondering if it is worth my time and that's a shame, since, given my history, my opinion will be asked in the next campaign.  

    At this point, I'm inclined to say the site is not recommended as it does not allow all comments to be heard.

    •  it goes in cycles (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dkmich, kurt, Catrina

      I stay out of the really popular diarys with over 100 comments and ones with troll wars. Some of people from here started another site focused mainly on the torture issue, but other stuff also. You are welcome to check it out. It's off to a slow but steady start.

      -8.63 -7.28

      by OneCrankyDom on Fri Dec 08, 2006 at 11:11:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This site does allow all comments to be heard. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Major Danby, Albatross

      The I/P diaries are not the standard.  I skip them because it brings out the same consistently hateful and biased commenters.  So be it.

      Yes, there are a lot of people who abuse the troll-rating capability; there are also a lot of us who fight it.  That's not surprising in an anonymous, unmoderated forum.  

      But, I am distinctly disinclined to believe that this is a site where all comments are heard.  TU status is easy pickings, you can still read hidden comments.

      Try to be heard with on Red State: it will not happen.  They erase the evidence as it falls to cyberground.  THAT will never happen here.

      Who knew? Chamonix. But did he tell us? NO!

      by 2lucky on Fri Dec 08, 2006 at 11:11:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I/P diaries tend to bring out the worst (4+ / 0-)

      in the blogosphere in general, not just here.

      And honestly, it's extremely unlikely that a candidate wishing to reach out to the Democratic blogosphere would skip this site on the basis of one person - no matter how respected a professional - saying that some comments get hidden.  In fact, comment hiding is one of the things that's allowed this site to grow to the point where it is an almost necessary stop for candidates.

      •  some of the admins (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sobermom, newhorizon, jhritz

        might want to lurk into some of the i/ps, to see some of the outrageous crap that's being said, and who's rec'ing it up- despite others tr'ing. can be very disturbing. tonight's rec'd diary was no exception.

        © 2006 "we've done the impossible, and that makes us mighty!" -malcolm reynolds

        by Laurence Lewis on Fri Dec 08, 2006 at 11:45:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not saying they'd skip it (0+ / 0-)

        Candidates will use everything they can.

        It's about how seriously they'll take what the posters themselves have to say.  

        One of the biggest problems I ran into on the '04 campaign had to do with the professional operatives who didn't take the blogosphere seriously and did everything they could to discredit what was said there.

        They still feel that way, if only because they see the blogosphere as a threat to their positions as the only credible advisors.

        So, when you have people who straddle the two worlds, as I did (I was a campaign's voter outreach coordinator, as well as running an Internet site), we're already up against the traditional consultants who see us as going outside the mainstream...  

        And, for the cynical view, most candidates look at the blogosphere the same why they look at all grassroots: A potential source of cash and a free medium with which to post their views.

        Sad, but true, even if they'd like to be interested.  Elections are simply too expensive and they're taking too much money (on both sides) from corporate interests not to take their views as a priority.

        Anything that hurts a sites credibility is up against all that, as well as the actions on the site that lead to question.  

        If a site wants to be taken as more than a potential ATM and outlet for messaging during the next campaign, the admins need be scrupulous.  

        At this point, they're not, especially when it comes to the I/P posts and what's either said there or trolled out is a hornet's nest no candidate is going to want to be associated with.

        •  I think you're making a mountain out of a (0+ / 0-)

          molehill here.

          Sure, those threads get ugly sometimes, and some people say some really ugly things that some other people then feel a need to uprate.  In fact, that would be my biggest complaint - not that people are silenced by having their comments hidden, but that comments that should be hidden get uprated by people who clearly are rating the poster and not the post.

          Apparently you've had comments hidden and disagreed?  I hardly think it's going to hurt the site's credibility overall that some people find some things you say to be offensive (just guessing, since they got hidden and all).

          •  Incorrect guess (0+ / 0-)

            The comments that were hidden came from a few anti-Semitic posters that went over the top.  The entire threads got buried as a result.  Don't necessarily have a problem with that and it didn't directly effect me.

            What I'm talking about is the way I've been seeing troll rating by TU's applied to people they don't agree with.

            My concern is that it's being misused by people who have an agenda, as opposed to being used by people trying control people's agendas.

            In other words, in some cases, the trolls are doing the troll rating.

            •  What cases would those be? (0+ / 0-)

              Just curious, because I really haven't seen that, in several years.

              Maybe I've missed the worst flame wars, because I stay away from meta-diaries as a rule - not very interesting - but I can't say I've seen comments hidden that weren't truly offensive.

              And of course on I/P threads, emotions run high, but very, very few comments get hidden, and usually when they do, it's for good reason.

              So, since you've brought this up numerous times on numerous threads, implying that you would use your connections to somehow have this reflect badly on the site, I would really like to know what you're talking about.  Because I just haven't seen this.  Maybe I don't hang around in the right/wrong places.

              •  From this diary (0+ / 0-)

                From a few threads up:

                Nyceve writes:

                   Lokikoki, evidently has a problem . . . (3+ / 1-)

                Who gave the 1- troll rating to Nyceve?

                Why aren't they identifying themselves?

                That is a minor example of what I'm questioning.

                I see it all the time, all over DKos, on an exponential level.

                There needs to be a revamping of the TU system.  The rating recommends are often used to push an agenda and the troll ratings are often used to attempt to silence or discredit posts/posters they don't agree with.

                •  Me (whining): "are you really going to make me (0+ / 0-)

                  follow up few threads up in this enormous diary?"

                  Couldn't you just cut and past what she was referring to?  Please?

                  I've been here for donkey's ears, on a very regular basis, ages and ages before I registered, and never seen someone silenced for voicing opinions others don't agree with, unless they're really nasty and offensive.

                  Can you give me the whole example?  And who is not identifying themselves?  You can see who has given troll ratings.

                  I really don't see this problem.  My main issue with I/P threads is that certain people, whom I shall not name, uprate every racist anti-[certain ethnic/religious group] comment because they think, somehow, it's ok since they agree with the posters' positions generally.  Uprating nasty comments should be as bad as making them, or almost as bad.  At least, people should be held accountable.  Kind of the opposite of your complaint, I think.

                  •  Try this diary (0+ / 0-)

                    Here's one that was very thoughtfully written and had thoughtful replies.

                    But look at the troll ratings on the comments supported the I (or J) side of the I/P issue.


                    Some TU's (trusted users) are abusing the ratings.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (121)
  • Community (58)
  • 2016 (45)
  • Elections (37)
  • Environment (35)
  • Media (34)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (33)
  • Republicans (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Law (28)
  • Barack Obama (27)
  • Iraq (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Jeb Bush (24)
  • Climate Change (24)
  • Culture (23)
  • Economy (20)
  • Bernie Sanders (18)
  • Labor (18)
  • White House (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site